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: 02/21/2026 06:26 AM

Report Question ID Question Discussion Answer Year
20130146 Histology--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: What is the histology code for a diagnosis of myeloproliferative neoplasm/myelodysplastic syndrome overlap?

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

Code the histology to 9975/3 [myelodysplastic/myeloproliferative neoplasm, unclassifiable]. Per the Definition section in the Heme DB, this neoplasm has the, "Clinical laboratory and morphological features of myeloproliferative neoplasm but fails to meet the criteria for a specific myeloproliferative neoplasm; or presents with features that overlap two or more MPN neoplasms."

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
20130197 MP/H Rules/Histology--Urinary System: What is the histology code for a 2007 and later diagnosis of papillary carcinoma of the urinary system organs? See Discussion.

Will histology code 8050 [papillary carcinoma, NOS] be used for cases diagnosed 2007 and later? The MP/H Rule H4 for urinary primaries states to code papillary carcinoma to code 8130, but Rule M6 includes tumors coded to 8050.

The IARC publication Pathology and Genetics of Tumours of the Urinary System and Male Genital Organs uses code 8130 only for papillary carcinoma.

Code the histology to 8130 [papillary transitional cell carcinoma] for cases of papillary carcinoma of the urinary system diagnosed 2007 and later.

Histology code 8050 [papillary carcinoma, NOS] should not be used for papillary carcinoma of the urinary system diagnosed starting in 2007. Rule M6 includes this histology to take pre-2007 cases into consideration.

2013
20130094 MP/H Rules/Multiple primaries--Lung: How many primaries are accessioned and which M rule applies for a 2010 diagnosis of clear cell adenocarcinoma of the left upper lobe lung followed by a 2012 diagnosis of adenosquamous carcinoma of lung origin without evidence of a primary lung tumor? See Discussion.

Patient was diagnosed with T1 N0 M0 adenocarcinoma with prominent clear cell features [8310/3] in the LUL on 08/05/2010. The patient underwent a lobectomy only.

On 10/09/2012 the patient underwent an iliac bone biopsy showing non-small cell carcinoma with glandular and squamous features [8560/3]. Clinically, the physician is calling this stage IV adenosquamous carcinoma of lung origin involving lymph nodes, spleen and bones. There were no FDG avid pulmonary nodules found. There was no pathologic comparison to the prior lung tumor.

Should the 2012 diagnosis be a new primary because the histology is different from the 2010 diagnosis? Or should this be one primary because there appears to be only metastatic disease with no new primary lung tumor identified in 2012? The choice of one primary seems supported by the fact that the 2012 tumor showed glandular and squamous features, and the 2010 tumor also showed glandular and clear cell (NOS) features. The clear cell could have been a clear cell squamous cell carcinoma. The original tumor was not re-examined.

Accession a single primary, clear cell adenocarcinoma [8310/3] of the left upper lobe lung [C341] diagnosed on 08/05/2010.

The MP/H Rules do not apply to the 2012 diagnosis because only metastatic sites were examined and there was no re-examination of the original 2010 tumor. Therefore, the disease process in 2012 is assumed to be metastatic from the lung primary diagnosed in 2010.

2013
20130002

Multiple primaries--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: How many primaries are accessioned, and what is the year of diagnosis, when the patient was initially diagnosed with poorly differentiated, diffuse lymphocytic lymphoma, small cleaved cell [9591/3] in 1991, followed by multiple recurrences and transformations? See Discussion.

5/1991 Left groin biopsy: Poorly differentiated, diffuse lymphocytic lymphoma, small cleaved cell [9591/3].

Subsequently, the patient had multiple recurrences.

7/1/08 Left axillary biopsy: Disease transformed to malignant lymphoma, large B-cell and a small focus of follicular lymphoma.

Patient was followed until there was no evidence of disease.

4/22/10 Left axillary biopsy: Recurrence of follicular lymphoma, grade 1. No large cell component was found. The bone marrow biopsy was negative for lymphoma. The patient was on observation.

11/02/10 MD note indicates the disease progressed to follicular lymphoma, grade 3. No large cell component was identified. The patient clinically has no evidence of disease on maintenance Rituxan.

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, non-Hodgkin lymphoma (previously called poorly differentiated, diffuse lymphocytic lymphoma, small cleaved cell) [9591/3] diagnosed in 1991.

Determining the number of primaries is based on the rules in effect at the time of each diagnosis. The original lymphoma was diagnosed in 1991 and the first transformation to follicular lymphoma in 2008. The pre-2010 rules for coding histology and determining multiple primaries must be applied first because the rules changed for diagnoses occurring 2010 or later. Per the Single Versus Subsequent Primaries Table, poorly differentiated, diffuse lymphocytic lymphoma, small cleaved cell [9591/3] is the same primary as follicular lymphoma [9690].

The Heme DB and Manual are used to confirm that the 2010 recurrences of follicular lymphoma, grade 1 [9695/3], and follicular lymphoma, grade 3 [9698/3], are the same primary according to the Heme Calculator check required per Rule M15. Per the Heme DB page, the diagnoses follicular lymphoma, grade 3 [9698/3] and follicular lymphoma, grade 1 [9695/3] are comparable to follicular lymphoma [9690] as stated in the section.

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
20130027

Reportability--Are well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumors and grade 1 neuroendocrine tumors of the appendix now reportable? See Discussion.

The terminology for carcinoid tumors has changed. The current terminology used is "neuroendocrine tumor." Are well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumors of the appendix non-reportable because carcinoid, NOS of the appendix has a borderline behavior code [8240/1]? When the histology/behavior codes for the term "well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumor" became 8240/3, did SEER intend this change to also apply to appendix primaries? If so, for which diagnosis year did this change go into effect?

Well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumors and grade 1 neuroendocrine tumors of the appendix are reportable because these tumors have a morphology code 8240/3 per the WHO Classification of Tumors of the Digestive System. However, per the ICD-O-3, carcinoid tumors of the appendix have a behavior code of /1 [borderline].

The terminology of neuroendocrine tumors is evolving and current thinking at the international level is that carcinoid/WD NET of appendix is reportable. However, reportability in the United States is based on ICD-O-3. The histology code for "Carcinoid of appendix" is 8240/1; the histology code for a carcinoids of all other primary sites is 8240/3. Until the United States adopts the proposed changes for ICD-O-3, reportability of appendix cases is as follows:

  • Carcinoid
  • Well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumor
  • Grade 1 neuroendocrine tumor
  • Well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumor/carcinoid (Pathologist uses both terms in reporting the diagnosis and does not want to choose one diagnosis over the other.)
 2013
20130051 Multiple primaries--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: How many primaries are accessioned when biopsies of the left and right tonsils show diffuse large B-cell lymphoma and there is no other evidence of involvement? See Discussion. Scans are negative for lymphadenopathy and the bone marrow biopsy was benign. Radiation Oncology staged this as localized bilateral tonsil primary lymphoma.

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, diffuse large B-cell lymphoma [9680/3] of bilateral tonsils. Per Rule M2, a single histology is a single primary. Note 1 for Rule M2 states bilateral involvement of lymph nodes and/or organs is still a single 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.

2013
20130185

Reportability/Behavior: Is HGSIL (high grade squamous intraepithelial lesion) of the vulva or vagina reportable and is it a synonym for histology code 8077/2 [squamous intraepithelial neoplasia, grade III]?

For cases diagnosed 2018 and later

HGSIL of the vulva or vagina is reportable. HGSIL is a synonym for squamous intraepithelial neoplasia, grade III.

 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
20130042 Reportability--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: Is follicular lymphoma in situ reportable? See Discussion.

Parotid mass and intraparotid lymph node biopsy: Follicular lymphoma in situ (see note).

Note: The morphologic findings in conjunction with the results of immunohistochemical stains demonstrate focal follicular lymphoma in situ in a background of reactive follicular hyperplasia. Cytogenetic studies on the parotid mass demonstrated a normal karyotype. FISH analysis for BCL2 and BCL6 gene rearrangements has been requested and will be reported separately.

Per the Note under Case Reportability Instructions Rule 3 in the Hematopoietic and Lymphoid Neoplasm Manual, do not report in situ [/2] lymphomas. 2013
20130077 Reportability--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasm: What is the histology code if a myeloproliferative disorder is reportable should a physician suspect this diagnosis and treats the patient? See Discussion. Physician suspects patient has a myeloproliferative disorder and treats her with a phlebotomy and Hydrea. Patient receives Hydrea during an inpatient stay, but does not see the Heme/Onc again. The patient is subsequently only seen by a Palliative Medicine physician who also states she has an underlying myeloproliferative disorder. The patient died while an inpatient.

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

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

The term is a reportable ambiguous term per the Hematopoietic Coding Manual (Case Reportability Instructions, Rule 4). Also, the patient was treated for a myeloproliferative disorder, making this a reportable clinical diagnosis per the SEER Manual (Reportability, Pg 4, Exception 1).

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

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