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: 02/16/2026 10:32 AM

Report Question ID Question Discussion Answer Year
20130157

Primary Site--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: What primary site code should be assigned and what rule justifies that code?

Scenario: Pleural effusion, underwent thoracentesis. Pleural fluid unexpectedly showed Large B-Cell Lymphoma. Extensive workup including CT & PET was done and all findings were within normal limits. No evidence of lymphoma was seen and no palpable adenopathy was found. The only indication of lymphoma was the malignant pleural effusion.

Code to pleura, C384.

Per the Hematopoietic database, Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma can originate in the pleural cavity.

2013
20130064 Primary site--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: Are hematopoietic primaries coded to C421 [bone marrow] or C420 [blood]?

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

Refer to the Hematopoietic Database and Manual to determine the primary site.

Leukemias are coded to C421 [bone marrow]. The ONLY neoplasm that is coded to C420 [blood] is Waldenstrom's macroglobulinemia [9761/3].

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
20130215

Reportability--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: Is hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis synonymous with an EBV-associated lymphoproliferative disorder in children reportable? See Discussion.

Pathology report states: Prominent T-cell infiltrate with frequent immunoblast-like cells. COMMENT: Findings consistent with an acute EBV-associated hemophagocytic process. In addition, there is a prominent CD8 + T-cell infiltrate with many large, activated forms. This T-cell process may represent an EBV-associated lymphoproliferative disorder in children.

EBV-associated lymphoproliferative disorder in children is listed in the Heme database. However, throughout multiple admissions, the oncologist states the diagnosis as "hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis". Are the two the same condition?

The patient is being treated with Etoposide.

Per Appendix F, do not report this case based on the information provided.

The oncologist likely used the pathology report and clinical factors to determine the diagnosis of hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis, which is not reportable. Hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis is caused by an over stimulated immune system (infection, etc.). This clinical syndrome is associated with a variety of underlying conditions. To be reportable, it must state "fulminant hemophagocytic syndrome" (in a child) to be reportable (9724/3).

The pathology report for this case is not definitive. It states that the process "may" represent the EBV-associated lymphoproliferative disorder in children.

Follow back on this case to confirm reportability if possible.

 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
20130009 Grade--Pancreas: Can the grade be coded when a biopsy is taken from the part of a primary tumor that has contiguously extended into an adjacent organ or structure? See Discussion. The grade rule states to code grade from tissue removed from the primary tumor only, never from a metastatic site or a site of recurrence. There is no mention of whether the grade can be coded if only the contiguous site of involvement is biopsied when a single tumor directly extends to an adjacent tissue or organ. For example, is grade coded to 2 when a pancreatic tumor extends into the duodenum, and the duodenal biopsy confirms moderately differentiated adenocarcinoma consistent with a pancreatic primary? Or does the primary organ/site have to be biopsied in order to be able to code grade?

For one tumor involving a contiguous site, when there is no tissue specimen available from the primary site, you may code the grade based on the tissue from the tumor in the contiguous site.

This instruction is included in the upcoming grade instruction document.

 2013
20130119 Reportability--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: Would this case be reportable? Patient with a myelodysplastic syndrome secondary to a copper deficiency. Myelodysplastic syndrome is a reportable disease. Document in the text that the MDS was due to a copper deficiency. 2013
20130040

Multiple primaries--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: How many primaries are accessioned and what rule applies when a patient has a history of chronic myeloid leukemia diagnosed in 1993 followed by a diagnosis of acute myeloid leukemia arising in chronic myelogenous leukemia, blast phase? See Discussion.

12/1993 Bone marrow biopsy: Chronic myeloid leukemia t(9;22) (q34;q11).

09/2011 Bone marrow biopsy: Abnormal cytogenetic & FISH support persistent involvement by chronic myelogenous leukemia.

12/2011 Peripheral blood, flow cytometry: Involvement by acute myeloid leukemia arising in chronic myelogenous leukemia (CML, blast phase, 30% blasts by manual diff.).

Is the 12/2011 diagnosis a new primary? If not, why don't Rules M8-M13 apply when the Heme DB Abstractor Notes section for CML indicates that when there is a chronic, accelerated and blast phase that develops later in the course of the disease, change the histology code to the more specific diagnosis?

 

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

This case should be accessioned as a multiple primary: chronic myelogenous leukemia t(9;22) (q34;q11) [9863/3] diagnosed in 1993 and acute myeloid leukemia [9861/3] diagnosed in 2011 per Rule M15.

Use the diagnosis date to determine the appropriate manual and rules to follow to determine the histologies for this case. To determine the histology of the 1993 diagnosis, use the ICD-O-2. The Heme Manual & DB will be used to determine the number of primaries and the histology of the 2011 diagnosis of AML.

Rules M8-M13 in the Heme Manual cannot be applied to this case because no transformation occurred. CML does not transform to another 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
20140064

Reportability--Testis: Is a mature teratoma of the testis reportable? See discussion.

Mature teratoma is listed as a benign neoplasm (9080/0) in the ICD-O-3. SINQ 20120085 references a NAACCR Webinar that indicated pure mature teratomas of the testis in adults are reportable. We are not aware of any further documentation of this change in reportability. When did mature teratomas of the testis for adults become reportable? What is the defined age range for "adult"? The original SINQ question above lists the 2012 SEER Manual as a Reference, however, no clarification or mention of this change in reportability was found in that manual.

For testis, mature teratoma in an adult (post-puberty) is reportable because it is malignant (9080/3); however, mature teratoma in a child is benign (9080/0). The 2011 NAACCR webinar introduced this concept and it was documented in the 2012 SINQ question. You may use 2011 or 2012 as the date of this change. The next edition of the SEER manual will include reportability examples.

2014
20140070

Reportability--Pancreas: Is this reportable? Is this benign? If reportable, what histology code and behavior code should be used? A final pathology diagnosis reads: "Cystic pancreatic endocrine neoplasm (CPEN)".

"Cystic pancreatic endocrine neoplasm (CPEN)" is reportable. Assign 8150/3 based on the information provided. We consulted our expert pathologist and he states "Since metastases have been reported in a few, and all the rest of the pancreatic endocrine tumors are now designated malignant, …we are safe considering them /3 until proven otherwise. Since most of them are non-functioning, [assign code] 8150/3 unless specified as to G1 (8240/3) or G2 (8249/3)."

2014
20140040

Reportability/Primary Site--Lip: Is a right lower lip (NOS) squamous cell carcinoma reportable when the microscopic description states the tumor arises from the epidermis and extends through the dermis? See discussion.

We are having difficulty determining whether the primary site is lip, NOS (C009) or skin of lip (C440). Usually we look for a statement of “skin” or “mucosa” in the microscopic description if the specimen label is only lip, NOS as instructed by the previous SINQ 20051049. Is a statement of "epidermis" or "dermis" in the microscopic description enough to indicate carcinoma is arising in the skin of the lip (C440) and thus not reportable?

This case is interpreted as skin of lip and not reportable. According to our expert pathologist consultant, the pathologist in this case "is specifically saying "epidermis" and "dermis" and I would have to think it is skin, and thus not reportable."

2014