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: 02/19/2026 04:21 AM

Report Question ID Question Discussion Answer Year
20170012

Primary Site/Sarcoma--Breast: How should the primary site and stage be coded for osteosarcoma of breast? Is C509 correct or should the code be a different primary site? When assigning C509, the Collaborative Stage (CS) still pertains to breast cancer and AJCC stages it as a breast cancer and not as a sarcoma.

Code primary osteosarcoma of the breast to breast, C500-C509. Not all site and histology combinations can be staged in CS or AJCC. 9180/3 of breast cannot be staged using the CS breast schema. Breast (C500-C509) cannot be staged using the CS soft tissue schema. The same is true for AJCC. You can stage this case using SEER Summary Stage.

Important: Do NOT change the primary site or histology code based on whether or not the case can be CS or AJCC staged. We need to know how many cases are unable to be staged because of their primary site and histology combinations.

 2017
20170019

MP/H Rules/Histology--Testis: How should histology be coded for a mixed germ cell tumor that also includes choriocarcinoma now that non-seminomatous mixed germ cell tumors (9065) and seminomatous mixed germ cell tumors (9085) are collapsed for analysis? See Discussion.

The MP/H Rules (Other Sites Terms and Definitions, Table 2) currently lists a separate mixed germ cell tumor code (9101) for germ cell tumors with choriocarcinoma plus teratoma, seminoma or embryonal carcinoma. Is this separate mixed germ cell tumor code still to be used now that all mixed germ cell tumors (9065 and 9085) have been collapsed into code 9085 for analysis per SINQs 20160056 and 20110013? The current WHO Classification for testis tumors does not list code 9101, but also collapses all seminomatous and nonseminomatous mixed germ cell tumors of more than one histologic type under code 9085.

While WHO 4th Ed Tumors of Urinary and Male Genital System does not include 9101/3, this code has not been made obsolete. Follow the 2007 MP/H rules and code histology to 9101/3 per Other sites rule H16, Table 2.

 2017
20170036

Grade--Prostate: How are the prostate-related fields completed when documentation in pathology reports only includes one of the new grade groups? See Discussion.

Our pathologists have starting to use a new prostate cancer grading system that was adopted by WHO in 2016. The new grading scheme correlates with the prior Gleason grading scheme as follows:

Grade Group 1 = Gleason score 6 or less

Grade Group 2 = Gleason score 3+4=7

Grade Group 3 = Gleason score 4+3 = 7

Grade Group 4 = Gleason score 8

Grade Group 5 = Gleason score 9-10

Our pathologists are no longer dictating the Gleason Primary and Secondary Pattern values nor the Gleason's Score. Reverse correlation from the new grade groups to the required patterns and score are difficult with Grade Groups 2 and 3 needing to be distinguished from one another and Grade Group 5 including two unique scores.

The prostate-related fields include:

Collaborative Site Specific Factor 7: Gleason's Primary Pattern and Secondary Pattern Values on Needle Core Biopsy/TURP

Collaborative Site Specific Factor 8: Gleason's Score On Needle Core Biopsy/TURP

Collaborative Site Specific Factor 9: Gleason's Primary Pattern and Secondary Pattern Values on Prostatectomy/Autopsy

Collaborative Site Specific Factor 10: Gleason's Score on Prostatectomy/Autopsy

When all you have is the grade group, you may use the following table to convert the Prostate Grade Groups to the appropriate code for the indicated fields.

Grade Group Gleason Score Gleason Pattern SSF7 SSF8 SSF9 SSF10 Grade/diff

Grade Group 1 6 or less <=3+3 099 999 099 999 1

Grade Group 2 7 3+4 034 007 034 007 2

Grade Group 3 7 4+3 043 007 043 007 2

Grade Group 4 8 4+4, 3+5, 5+3 999 999 999 999 3

Grade Group 5 9-10 4+5, 5+4, 5+5 099 999 099 999 3

 2017
20170060

MP/H Rules/Histology/Grade--Unknown & ill-defined sites: What is the correct histology and grade of a liver biopsy with metastatic neuroendocrine carcinoma low to intermediate grade if primary site is unknown? See Discussion.

CT-guided liver biopsy, diagnosis: Metastatic neuroendocrine carcinoma. Diagnosis Comment: Cytology of the tumor appears to be low to intermediate grade.

Would this case be coded as an atypical carcinoid tumor (8249/3) based on SINQ 20170033 and the statement of intermediate grade; or should this be 8240/3 (neuroendocrine tumor) per SINQ 20160023 because it is a metastatic site? More clarification is needed on when to code 8249/3 or 8240/3 for a neuroendocrine carcinoma or neoplasm seen in a metastatic specimen only when there is specified grade.

Assign histology code 8246/3 and assign code 9 for grade.

Since the primary is unknown and the type of NEC is not definitively stated, code neuroendocrine carcinoma, NOS based on the diagnosis.

Code grade from primary tumor only. Assign grade code 9 when the primary site is unknown. See instruction 2.b. in the Grade Coding Instructions for 2014+.

SINQ 20170033 and SINQ 20160023 provide instructions for coding the grade/differentiation field. Using these SINQ questions to code histology could lead to errors.

 2017
20170063

Reportability/Behavior--Ovary: Is adult granulosa cell tumor a reportable malignant tumor if the primary ovarian tumor ruptured intraoperatively, the peritoneum was contaminated, and the patient underwent adjuvant treatment with chemotherapy given the increased risk of recurrence due to intraoperative tumor spill? See Discussion.

Per SINQ 20130176 and 20140034, adult granulosa cell tumors of the ovary are reportable malignant tumors when there are peritoneal implants or metastases. The SINQ responses describe how these adult granulosa cell tumors are different from low malignant potential (LMP) epithelial ovarian tumors. Would these SINQ scenarios apply to a case with intraoperative tumor rupture that resulted in peritoneal tumor?

In this case, the pathologist indicated these excised peritoneal specimens were favored to be intraoperative contamination with adult granulosa cell tumor. However, the oncologist went on to treat this patient as high risk with chemotherapy. The oncologist only described one of the pelvic peritoneal implants as possibly contamination due to the rupture. The oncologist never indicated the tumors were definitely peritoneal implants. Should the behavior of this tumor be /1 because the peritoneal tumor appears to be contamination, or /3 because the oncologist treated this patient as high risk?

If the "implants" were due to intraoperative contamination and were not present prior to surgery, do not interpret them as indicative of malignancy. The behavior of this tumor is /1.

 2017
20170042

Reportability--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: Is a diagnosis of chronic lymphocytic leukemia/small lymphocytic lymphoma (CLL/SLL) with large cell transformation equivalent to a diagnosis of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) without mention of Richter transformation or Richter Syndrome? See Discussion.

The patient has a history of CLL/SLL dating back to 2007, but has had progressive disease with development of a new left frontal brain tumor. The brain tumor resection proved CLL/SLL with large cell transformation, but neither the pathologist nor the managing physician called this a Richter transformation, Richter syndrome or provided a diagnosis of DLBCL. However, a large cell transformation of CLL/SLL is a Richter transformation. Can this be accessioned as a new acute neoplasm per Rule M10?

Accession as multiple primaries according to Hematopoietic and Lymphoid Neoplasm Coding Manual Rule M10. Chronic lymphocytic leukemia/small lymphocytic lymphoma (CLL/SLL) followed by CLL/SLL with large cell transformation is multiple primaries because it is a chronic neoplasm followed by an acute neoplasm, more than 21 days in this case.

 2017
20170035

MP/H Rules/Histology--Fallopian Tube: What is the histology code of serous tubal intraepithelial (in situ) carcinoma (STIC), bilateral fallopian tubes?

Assign 8441/2. This is based on the WHO classification for female reproductive system tumors.

 2017
20170017

MP/H Rules/Multiple primaries--Liver: How many primaries of the same site and histology are reported if tumors appear years apart but neither is surgically removed? See Discussion.

Patient has an April 2009 biopsy proven diagnosis of cholangiocarcinoma with a single liver mass in segment 4 that was treated with TACE and systemic chemotherapy. The treated lesion was stated to be stable in subsequent scans performed between 2010 and late 2015.

December 2015 imaging identified a new mass in the left hepatic lobe consistent with cholangiocarcinoma. Is the 2015 tumor a new primary?

In auditing files for expected (but not received) abstracts due from facilities, we've observed these types of cases not being consistently reported as multiple primaries.

Abstract as a single primary. The 2009 liver tumor remained "stable" following treatment and the patient was never disease free.

 2017
20170005

Reportability/Histology--Testis: Is neoplasm consistent with carcinoid type of monodermal teratoma reportable as a teratoma, NOS, and if yes, what is the histology code?

Carcinoid type of monodermal teratoma or well differentiated neuroendocrine tumor (carcinoid), monodermal teratoma of the testis is reportable. Assign 8240/3 according to the WHO classification for this neoplasm.

 2017
20170073

Histology/Behavior--Brain and CNS: How are histology and behavior coded for a diagnosis of pineal anlage tumor in an infant? See Discussion.

Patient is an 11 month old with brain biopsy showing final diagnosis of pineal anlage tumor. How are behavior and histology coded for this rare tumor?

Assign 9362/3 for pineal anlage tumors. According to the WHO Classification of Tumors of the Central Nervous System, 4th edition, pineal anlage tumors, while extremely rare, share features with pineoblastoma. Although they have a distinct morphology, there is no other ICD-O-3 code for pineal anlage tumors.

 2017