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: 02/09/2026 21:24 PM

Report Question ID Question Discussion Answer Year
20130118 Primary site--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: How is the primary site coded for a diagnosis of Langerhans cell histiocytosis with extensive bony metastatic disease and lymphadenopathy? See Discussion. Patient was diagnosed with LCH on a biopsy of the right femur. Imaging showed extensive bony metastatic disease, extensive infiltrative perinephritis, encasement of both kidneys, renal hilar, retroperitoneal and periaortic lymphadenopathy. The right femur biopsy pathology report did not state this was metastatic.

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

Code the primary site to C419 [bone, NOS] per Rule PH30.

This patient has widely metastatic disease. Per Rule PH30, one needs to reference the Heme DB to determine the primary site and histology for this case. Per the Abstractor Notes section, Langerhans cell histiocytosis arises in the bone and many times can involve multiple bones, along with other organs and lymph nodes. Although the right femur was biopsied, this does not prove that the primary site is the femur [C402] because the patient has what was described as extensive bony metastatic disease.

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.

2013
20130110 Reportability--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: Is a diagnosis of "coagulable state" reportable?

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

The term "coagulable state" is not reportable. This is not a a neoplasm. The term means capable of coagulating or capable of becoming thick. There are neoplasms, such as polycythemia vera, in which the blood becomes thick; however, you must have an actual reportable diagnosis in order to accession the case.

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.

2013
20130078

Ambiguous terminology/Reportability--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: Is a physician diagnosis of "appears to be a myeloproliferative disorder" reportable if the patient has no treatment and the physician elects to follow the patient with CBC's?.

Yes. This is a reportable diagnosis and should be accessioned with the histology coded to 9975/3 [myelodysplastic/myeloproliferative neoplasm, unclassifiable].

The word is a reportable ambiguous term per the Hematopoietic Coding Manual (Case Reportability Instructions, Rule 4).

Myeloproliferative disorder is synonymous with myeloproliferative disease. Myeloproliferative disease is listed as an alternate name for myelodysplastic/myeloproliferative neoplasm, unclassifiable.

 2013
20130084 Multiple primaries--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: How many primaries are accessioned when a patient is diagnosed on a 3/16/12 lymph node biopsy with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma which was followed on 4/18/12 with bone marrow biopsy diagnosis of follicular lymphoma? See Discussion. The patient has extensive right-sided cervical, supraclavicular, hilar, mediastinal and gastrohepatic adenopathy. A cervical node biopsy on 3/16/2012 showed DLBCL. On 04/18/2012 a bone marrow biopsy showed follicular lymphoma. The patient was started on CHOP/Rituxan after the bone marrow biopsy.

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

This case is accessioned as a single primary, diffuse large B-cell lymphoma [9680/3] per Rule M12. Abstract the acute neoplasm (DLBCL) when a patient is originally diagnosed with an acute neoplasm and the neoplasm reverts to the chronic neoplasm (follicular lymphoma) AND the patient has not been treated for the acute neoplasm.

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.

2013
20130010 MP/H Rules/Histology--Skin: How is the histology coded for "infiltrative carcinoma with ductal alterations compatible with squamoid eccrine ductal carcinoma" of the skin?

Code the histology to 8413/3 [eccrine adenocarcinoma]. This is the most specific code available for this diagnosis.

According to our expert pathologist advisor, "The adnexal glands in the skin, sweat (eccrine) glands and apocrine glands, all have ducts which connect the business portion of each gland to the skin surface. Some of the adnexal tumors have features of differentiation which appear to be duct-like, hence the designation 'ductal.'"

In addition, "The 'squamoid' simply indicates some degree of squamous differentiation, but doesn't alter the usefulness of [code 8413/3] because we have no way of coding anything more specific in this case anyway."

2013
20130138

Multiple primaries--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: How many primaries are accessioned if a 2010 diagnosis of a preleukemic condition is subsequently diagnosed in 2012 with a specific leukemia that is not listed as a transformation? See Discussion.

10/02/10 bone marrow biopsy showed myelodysplastic syndrome, unclassified [9989/3].

6/19/12 bone marrow biopsy showed chronic myelomonocytic leukemia (CMML-2) [9945/3].

CMML-2 is not listed as an acute neoplasm for MDS. Is this the same disease? Per the pre-2010 rules, this would be the same disease. The current Heme DB indicates these are separate primaries.

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

This case should be accessioned as two primaries, myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) [9989/3] diagnosed 10/2/10 and chronic myelomonocytic leukemia (CMML-2) [9945/3] diagnosed 6/19/12 per Rule M15. Per Rule M15, use the Multiple Primaries Calculator when rules M1-M14 do not apply.

When myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) became reportable, the rules in effect at that time resulted in MDS often being the only diagnosis reported when both MDS and a leukemia were diagnosed. Statistics for some leukemias were impacted. Now we report both the MDS and the leukemia for greater accuracy.

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.

 2013
20130050 Multiple Primaries/Primary site/Histology--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: How many primaries are accessioned and what is the primary site and histology for each if a 6/12/12 left shoulder mass specimen suspicious for large B-cell lymphoma is followed on 7/10/12 with three skin nodules excised from the back with a diagnosis of "composite lymphoma? See Discussion.

6/12/12 Excisional biopsy left shoulder soft tissue mass: Suspicious for large B-cell lymphoma.

7/10/12 Excisional biopsy three skin nodules of back: "Composite lymphoma" - primary cutaneous anaplastic large cell lymphoma (CD3 pos, CD4 pos, CD30 pos, ALK neg with partial loss of CD5) and CONCURRENT cutaneous follicular center lymphoma (CD20 pos, PAX5 pos, BCL-6 pos, partially CD10 pos) and flow cytometry revealed results compatible with involvement by a lymphoproliferative disorder of T-cell lineage.

Per imaging performed, there was no involvement of lymph nodes or other organs.

Is the primary site C449 Skin, NOS and histology 9718/3 [Lymphoma, primary cutaneous anaplastic large cell] be correct?

Code primary site to C445 [skin, back] and histology to 9718/3 [cutaneous anaplastic large cell lymphoma] .

Per Rule M6, abstract a single primary when two or more types of non-Hodgkin lymphoma are simultaneously present in the same anatomic location. For this case, there is cutaneous follicular (follicle) center lymphoma (9597/3) and cutaneous anaplastic large cell lymphoma (9718/3).

Per Rule PH22, code the primary site to the site or origin (skin, back) and the histology to the NHL with the numerically highest ICD-O-3 code. In this case, that would be 9718/3.

2013
20130219 Date of diagnosis/Ambiguous terminology--Breast: Can a mammogram BIRADS 4 or 5 assessment be used to assess reportability and can the date of the mammogram be used to code the date of diagnosis? See Discussion.

  1. Assessment: BIRADS category 4-suspicious. Findings are considered suspicious/indeterminate for malignancy

  • Assessment: BIRADS 5- highly suspicious. Findings are highly suggestive of malignancy.

  • Assessment: BIRADS 4- suspicious abnormality consider biopsy

    • Can the BIRADS number be used to assess reportability? Can a BIRADS assessment of "suspicious" be used to code the date of diagnosis?

    		BIRADS category 4 and category 5 mammograms are not to be interpreted as a reportable "malignancy" for cancer registry purposes nor are they to be used to code the date of diagnosis should the patient subsequently have a malignancy confirmed. 2013
    		20130155

    Diagnostic confirmation--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: How do we code diagnostic confirmation if the pathology report states the diagnosis of a skin biopsy is "low-grade B cell lymphoma, most compatible with marginal zone lymphoma," genetic data includes positive rearrangement for immunoglobulin heavy chain gene favor a diagnosis of "B cell lymphoma," and the physician's clinical diagnosis is "cutaneous marginal zone lymphoma"?

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

    Code diagnostic confirmation to 3 [positive histology AND positive immunophenotyping studies (9590/3 - 9992/3)].

    Immunoglobulin heavy and light chain genes rearranged is listed under Genetics Data in the Heme DB for 9699/3 [extranodal marginal zone lymphoma]. Given the documentation of this positive genetic finding and the positive bone marrow, code diagnostic confirmation to 3.

    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.

    		2013
    		20130047 Date of diagnosis--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: What is the diagnosis date for a patient with a mild thrombocytosis diagnosed in 2008, that was subsequently treated with Anagrelide in 11/2010 following an increase in platelet count, and later in 3/2011 was found to have positive JAK2 study physician refers to as essential thrombocythemia? See Discussion. In 2008, patient diagnosed with mild thrombocytosis. The patient opted to be followed clinically with observation. In November 2010, a CBC showed an increased platelet count to 600,000. Anagrelide was started. The patient would never agree to a bone marrow biopsy. However, in 3/2011 a JAK2 study was performed and read as positive. Following the positive Jak2 study, physician stated the diagnosis was essential thrombocytosis and started the patient on a different drug.

    Code the diagnosis date to 3/2011. It wasn't until 3/2011 that the physician documented a reportable diagnosis of essential thrombocytosis [9962/3].

    Mild thrombocytosis is not reportable. Therefore, the case was not reportable in 2008. Although the patient was treated in 2010, there was no documentation of a reportable diagnosis.

    		2013