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: 01/14/2026 16:52 PM

Report Question ID Question Discussion Answer Year
20130187 Reportability: Is a clinically diagnosed Stage III malignant thymoma reportable when the post-neoadjuvant resection showed spindle cell thymoma? See Discussion. A thymoma is described by the medical oncologist at the time of the initial diagnosis as a malignant thymoma, Stage III. The patient had neoadjuvant CAP chemotherapy followed by a resection. Following the resection, the pathologist stated the diagnosis was spindle cell thymoma. A malignant thymoma is reportable. Based on the information provided, a reportable diagnosis (malignant thymoma) was made by a physician and the patient was treated for this diagnosis. Because there is no mention of the initial diagnosis being amended based on the resection specimen's pathology report, assume the initial diagnosis is still valid. 2013
20130054 MP/H Rules/Multiple primaries--Lung: How many primaries are accessioned if a lobectomy has two tumors that are both stated to be adenocarcinoma but the pathologist states they are synchronous primaries? See Discussion.

Left upper lung lobectomy: Adenocarcinoma, poorly-differentiated (grade 3), tumor size 1.2 cm, confined to lung. Second primary lung tumor: adenocarcinoma, well-differentiated (grade 1), tumor size 0.9 cm, confined to lung. Diagnosis COMMENT: The two tumors, although both adenocarcinoma, show markedly different histologies and thus are classified as synchronous primaries. Multiple synchronous primaries are staged separately according to the 7th edition of AJCC.

The AJCC Staging Manual 7th ed states, "Multiple tumors may be considered to be synchronous primaries if they are of different histological cell types. When multiple tumors are of the same cell type, they should only be considered to be synchronous primary tumors if, in the opinion of the pathologist, based on features such as ..., they represent different subtypes of the same histologic cell type..."

In this case, the pathologist insists these are two synchronous primaries, although different subtypes are not given, because the tumors have different grades and look completely different under the microscope. The MP/H rules indicate this is a single primary. How many primaries are accessioned?

For cases diagnosed 2007 or later, accession a single primary, adenocarcinoma [8140/3] of the left upper lobe lung [C341]. 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 Lung MP rules because site specific rules exist for this primary.

Start at the MULTIPLE TUMORS module, rule M3. The rules are intended to be reviewed in consecutive order within a module. The patient has two tumors in the same lung with the same histology.

Do not use the AJCC Manual to make multiple primary decisions. Use the MP/H Rules to determine the number of primaries to accession.

2013
20130112 Primary site--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: How is the primary site coded for a diagnosis of post-transplant lymphoproliferative disorder (PTLD) diagnosed on an inguinal lymph node biopsy with CT scan evidence of lymphadenopathy in the chest, abdomen and pelvis if the bone marrow is also involved?

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

Code the primary site to multiple lymph node regions, NOS [C778] per Rule PH21 when multiple lymph node regions, as defined by the ICD-O-3, are involved and it is not possible to identify the lymph node region where the lymphoma originated

In the Abstractor Notes section in the Heme DB for PTLD it states PTLD commonly involves lymph nodes, GI tract, lungs and the liver. This patient has extensive lymph node involvement. Rule PH26 states to code the primary site to the bone marrow when ONLY the bone marrow is involved; however, that does not apply in this 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
20130148 Reportability--Brain and CNS: Are "spinal" schwannomas reportable if stated to be extradural, vertebral nerve sheath, or of specific vertebrae? See Discussion.

Are any of the following cases reportable?

Example 1: Clinical Diagnosis: Extradural spinal cord tumor compatible with schwannoma. What assumptions should be made about reportability if the tumor is described as being extradural? The extradural spinal cord includes epidural fat surrounding the thecal sac and exiting nerve roots. Does this mean there are not nerve roots in the extradural spinal cord?

Example 2: Final Pathologic Diagnosis: Designated "C3-4 nerve sheath tumor" excision: Morphologic and immunohistochemical findings consistent with cellular schwannoma. When stated to be a "nerve sheath tumor" does that mean peripheral nerve (C47_) involvement or nerve root (C72_) involvement?

Example 3: Final Pathologic Diagnosis: T-8 vertebral tumor resection: Schwannoma with degenerative changes (calcification, cyst formation) - ganglion and nerve are identified. There is no mention clinically or pathologically whether this tumor is "intradural" or "of the nerve root." In the absence of information about whether the location of the tumor is intradural or involving the nerve root, is it assumed that it does involve this part of the spinal cord when a specific vertebrae is removed?

Extradural schwannomas are not reportable. Neither vertebral nerve sheath nor a location of/on a specific vertebrae confirm the origin as being either extradural or intradural. Do not report a schwannoma if it cannot be determined to be "intradural" or "of the nerve root." 2013
20130024

MP/H Rules/Histology--Bladder: How many primaries are accessioned and what rule applies when the patient has a mixed tumor with a urothelial carcinoma, NOS and a more specific histologic type followed by a diagnosis of urothelial carcinoma? See Discussion.

The MP/H Rules do not specifically cover how to process urothelial carcinomas with a more specific type of carcinoma.

Patient 1: Diagnosed in April 2010 with invasive urothelial carcinoma with signet ring features of the bladder. Site and histology are coded as C679 [bladder] and 8490/3 [signet ring cell carcinoma]. In January 2012 a subsequent diagnosis of invasive urothelial carcinoma of the bladder is made [C679, 8120/3].

Patient 2: Diagnosed in November 2009 with invasive papillary urothelial carcinoma with micropapillary and mucinous features of the bladder. Site and histology are coded C679 [bladder] and 8480/3 [mucinous carcinoma]. In April 2012 a subsequent diagnosis of high grade papillary and flat urothelial carcinoma without evidence of invasion is made [C679, 8130/2].

Does rule M9 apply and these are new primaries?

For cases diagnosed 2007 and later, accession two primaries for each patient, signet ring cell carcinoma of the bladder and invasive urothelial carcinoma of the bladder for patient 1 and mucinous carcinoma of the bladder and non-invasive papillary urothelial carcinoma of the bladder for patient 2.

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 Urinary MP rules because site specific rules exist for this primary.

Start at the MULTIPLE TUMORS module, rule M3. The rules are intended to be reviewed in consecutive order within a module. For both patients, rule M9 applies because the tumors have histology codes that are different at the second (xxx) number.

This guideline will be reviewed for the next version of the MP/H Rules.

 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
20130111 Multiple primaries--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: How many primaries are accessioned if a 2008 diagnosis of extralymphatic follicular lymphoma in the breast is subsequently diagnosed in 2011 with ocular follicular lymphoma? See Discussion.

The patient was diagnosed with follicular lymphoma in the breast in 2008. Per notes, there was no evidence of disease again until 2011 when the patient presented with ocular lymphoma. The physician stated this was part of the same disease process as the prior breast diagnosis. The bone marrow was not involved in either case.

Is this a single primary (recurrence) of follicular lymphoma? Or are these multiple primaries because they arise in different extralymphatic sites?

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

Accession a single primary, follicular lymphoma [9690/3] of the breast diagnosed in 2008 per Rule M2.

Accession a single primary when there is a single histology. This is a recurrence of the patient's 2008 follicular lymphoma.

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
20130212 Reportability--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: Is a case reportable in which the pathology report is negative for plasmacytoma but a subsequent physician's clinical diagnosis is plasmacytoma?

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

This case is reportable if the patient was treated for plasmacytoma. When the physician calls the case plasmacytoma and treats the patient accordingly, report the case.

See Case Reportability Instructions #6: Report the case when there is a clinical diagnosis (physician's statement) of a reportable hematopoietic or lymphoid neoplasm.

Note 1: The clinical diagnosis may be a final diagnosis found within the medical record or recorded on a scan (CT, MRI for example)

Note 2: Report the case even if the diagnostic tests are equivocal. A number of hematopoietic neoplasms are "diagnoses of exclusion" in which the diagnostic tests are equivocal and the physician makes the clinical diagnosis based on the equivocal tests and the clinical picture. See the Heme DB for definitive diagnostic methods for the specific neoplasm being abstracted.

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
20130116 Histology/Primary site--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: How are the histology and primary site coded if a pleurocentesis is compatible with plasmablastic plasmacytoma/lymphoma when no further information is available?

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

Code the histology to 9735/3 [plasmablastic lymphoma] and the primary site to C809 [unknown] per Rule PH27.

Code the histology specified when the only histology for the case is preceded by ambiguous terminology. For this case, code the histology to plasmablastic lymphoma because it is the only histology mentioned in the diagnosis.

Per the Heme DB Abstractor Notes section for plasmablastic lymphoma, most patients present with Stage III-IV disease. The positive pleural fluid is likely due to advanced disease. In the absence of any other information for this case, Rule PH27 applies, "Code primary site to unknown primary site C809 when there is no evidence of lymphoma in lymph nodes AND the physician documents in the medical record that he/she suspects that the lymphoma originates in an organ(s) OR multiple organ involvement without any nodal involvement."

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
20130114 Histology--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: How is the histology coded when the bone marrow biopsy shows acute myeloid leukemia, but the physician states this is therapy-related AML secondary to prior radiation treatment? See Discussion. Physician states this patient has radiation therapy-related AML due to radiation received as treatment for a prior prostate cancer. The bone marrow and other immunophenotyping do not state this is therapy-related AML. Should the histology be coded AML, NOS [9861/3] or therapy-related AML [9920/3]?

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

Code the histology as therapy-related acute myeloid leukemia, NOS [9920/3] when the physician states this is a therapy-related AML.

The therapy-related diagnosis may be either clinically or pathologically stated to code the histology to 9920/3. In this case, the physician is aware of the previous chemotherapy, hormone therapy or radiation and adds that knowledge to the histologic findings of AML. The pathology report did not include this clinical, historical information as part of the final diagnosis. However, one can code therapy-related acute myeloid leukemia because clinically it was stated.

We recommend that you clearly document in the abstract that you are coding a clinical histology.

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