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: 11/10/2025 17:06 PM

Report Question ID Question Discussion Answer Year
20130089 MP/H Rules/Histology--Breast: How is the histology coded when a pre-treatment core biopsy showed ductal carcinoma, but the mastectomy specimen following neoadjuvant chemotherapy showed lobular carcinoma? See Discussion. 11/06/2012 Ultrasound-guided biopsy of the left breast and left axilla showed invasive ductal carcinoma. The patient underwent 6 months of chemotherapy. In 05/2013 the patient underwent a mastectomy that showed invasive lobular cancer, pleomorphic type, with 11 axillary lymph nodes negative.

The histology is coded to lobular carcinoma, NOS [8520/3] because the mastectomy (the most representative specimen) showed only lobular carcinoma.

The MP/H Rules state to code the histology from the most representative tumor specimen examined. Although this patient underwent neoadjuvant treatment, there is no indication that the ultrasound-guided biopsy contained more tumor than the mastectomy. The mastectomy is the most representative specimen and should be used to code the histology.

2013
20130052 Histology--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: How is the histology coded if a biopsy final diagnosis is diffuse large B-cell lymphoma but the physician's final diagnosis favored anaplastic large cell lymphoma? See Discussion. Patient has diffuse intrathoracic, intraabdominal and pelvic lymphadenopathy. An inguinal lymph node biopsy showed diffuse large B-cell lymphoma. The physician's final diagnosis favored anaplastic large cell lymphoma, but wanted to confirm this with FISH. The patient clinically deteriorated so the FISH studies were not done. Which histology is coded?

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

The histology should be coded as diffuse large B-cell lymphoma [9680/3]. The biopsy pathology report definitively diagnosed DLBCL. The physician's diagnosis cannot be used because it is an ambiguous diagnosis only, "favored anaplastic large cell lymphoma." "Favor" is an ambiguous term.

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
20130216

Primary site--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: Need help determining primary site for Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma 9680/3 confirmed pathologically in right ovary and soft tissue left adnexa. No lymph nodes examined pathologically. Patient treated outside and no access to notes. See discussion.

CT A/P massively enlarged uterus with no distention between the vagina, cervix or proximal to mid uterus identified. Highly concerning for malignancy though distinct etiology not clear. Ovarian not favored though not excluded given lack of clearly defined fat planes between uterus and either ovary. Extensive bilateral iliac chain and periaortic/pericaval lymphadenopathy.

Trying to work through Module 7 in the Hem DB. According to the ovary site, regional lymph nodes include the iliac and the para-aortic lymph nodes. This makes me think I should use Rule PH35 (organ and regional nodes). However, using Appendix C in the Hem DB, the iliac lymph nodes are part of the pelvic C775 while the para-aortic (periaortic) are intra-abdominal C772. This makes me wonder if I should go with rule PH36 present in organ and nodes that are not regional.

Use Rule PH25 and code primary site to C569.

First determine if the iliac and para-aortic lymph nodes are regional for Ovary. Use AJCC TNM or Collaborative Stage. Per AJCC 7th edition, regional lymph nodes for ovary include iliac and para-aortic (pg. 419). Therefore, this case involves an organ and its regional lymph nodes. Use appendix C to determine how to code a lymph node primary. It should not be used to determine whether lymph nodes are regional for a specific organ.

2013
20130029 Reportability--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: Is "post polycythemic myelofibrosis" reportable? See Discussion. The bone marrow biopsy showed post polycythemic myelofibrosis. JAK2 mutations were present confirming the diagnosis of post polycythemic myelofibrosis. The patient does have a history of polycythemia vera (PV).

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

Polycythemia Vera (PV) [9950/3] is reportable. The Abstractor Notes section in the Hematopoietic Database for PV indicates there are three phases of PV. The third phase is referred to as the "spent" or "post-polycythemic myelofibrosis phase". This patient appears to be in the third phase of PV. This would not be reported as a new primary if PV has already been reported.

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
20130210

Primary site--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: Does Rule PH27 apply meaning that primary site is coded to C809 or would it be more appropriate to code to C269 GI Tract NOS since all disease involves the GI tract and this is more specific?

Extranodal lymphoma first diagnosed in the stomach (fundus and antrum) which upon further investigation also involved the small bowel (MALT Lymphoma) in the absence of lymph node findings. MD staged this IIE. Initial thought was Gastric, but PET/CT indicated abnormal uptake involving loop of distended small bowel in the pelvis.

Assign C269 for Gastrointestinal tract, NOS. Apply Rule PH24, code to the organ when only an organ is involved. This rule can be used for NOS sites such as GI tract, NOS.

Based on the information provided, this lymphoma is confined to the GI tract -- stomach and small bowel.

2013
20130028 Primary site--CLL/SLL: How is the primary site coded and what rule applies when no bone marrow biopsy is performed on a patient diagnosed with chronic lymphocytic leukemia/small lymphocytic lymphoma (CLL/SLL) which was based on the results of an axillary biopsy, positive peripheral blood and a CT scan showing multiple lymph nodes involved above and below the diaphragm? See Discussion The physician staged this as Stage 0 CLL/SLL. Should the primary site be coded to lymph nodes if the MD stated this was leukemia?

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

Code the primary site to C421 [bone marrow] per Rule PH5. Code the primary site to the bone marrow when the peripheral blood is involved, even if no bone marrow biopsy is performed.

According to the notes for Rule PH5, CLL always has peripheral blood involvement (PH5 Note 1). CLL/SLL may also have involvement of lymph node regions in later stages (PH5, Note 2). For this patient a bone marrow biopsy was not performed but he had extensive lymph node and peripheral blood involvement. Therefore, the primary site is coded to C421. In addition, the physician's documentation specifies this patient has Stage 0 disease which indicates this disease process is being classified as leukemia (CLL).

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
20130090 MP/H Rules/Primary site/Histology--Colon/Rectum: How are the primary site and histology to be coded for a diagnosis of familial polyposis with malignant tumors in the sigmoid and rectum? See Discussion.

Preoperative diagnosis was familial polyposis with rectal and rectosigmoid cancer.

The pathology report from the colon resection showed:

  1. 5 mm tumor in the sigmoid. Histologic type: adenocarcinoma.

  • 1.9 cm tumor in the distal rectum. Histologic type: adenocarcinoma with signet ring cell differentiation.

  • 4 cm tumor in the proximal rectum. Histologic type: adenocarcinoma.

    • Gross description: The mucosa of the colon is tan pink with polyposis throughout; more than 1000 tan sessile polyps.

    Should this be a single primary per MP/H Rule M3, histology coded to 8220/3 [familial polyposis] per MP/H Rule H17, and primary site coded to C199?

    This case should be accessioned as a single primary. Code the primary site to the colon and rectum [C199] and the histology to adenocarcinoma in familial polyposis coli [8220/3] per MP/H Rule H17.

    For cases of familial polyposis, when the rectosigmoid or rectum are involved, assign code C199 [colon and rectum]. When the rectosigmoid or rectum are not involved, assign code C189 [colon, NOS].

    		2013
    		20130222 MP/H Rules/Histology--Bladder: How is the histology coded for a single bladder tumor showing invasive urothelial carcinoma with extensive divergent differentiation including small cell carcinoma, micropapillary carcinoma, and squamous cell carcinoma features? See Discussion. MP/H rules seem to lead to Rule H8 which indicates that one use the numerically higher ICD-O-3 code. If one applies Rule H8, the histology is coded to 8131/3 [micropapillary urothelial carcinoma]. That would ignore the small cell carcinoma, which seems prognostically more significant. Code the histology to 8045/3 [mixed small cell carcinoma], a combination of small cell with other types of carcinoma. There is currently no rule in the urinary site MP/H Rules for this combination of histologies. This will be included in the next revision of the MP/H Rules. 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