SEER Inquiry System - Search

Code primary site based on the site of origin as determined by the physicians. If the physicians state the site of origin is anus, code anus; the same as with skin. As you state, squamous cell cancer of sites coded to C44 is not reportable.  The AJCC instruction for physicians to stage perianal neoplasms within 5 cm of the anus using the Anus chapter does not change cancer registry instructions for coding primary site, nor does it affect cancer registry reportability instructions.

Abstract a single primary using Solid Tumor Rules, Malignant CNS and Peripheral Nerves, Rule M10 based on the information provided.  Rule M10 applies as both non-contiguous tumors are of the same histology; i.e., on the same row in Table 3. As MPNST can arise in many sites, look for information about the precise location and tissue type in which the tumor arose. For example, if the tumors are stated to arise in soft tissue, follow the Multiple Primary Rules for Other Sites.

Both WHO Classification of Central Nervous System Tumors and WHO Classification of Soft Tissue and Bone Tumors state that MPNST is a malignant spindle cell tumor often arising from a peripheral nerve, from a pre-existing benign nerve sheath tumor, or in a patient with neurofibromatosis type 1 (NF1).

Future updates will move C470-C479 from CNS to other sites module.

Use the histology codes SCC, HPV-associated (8085/3) and SCC, HPV-independent (8086/3) only when HPV testing is done on that specimen.  Do not use previous HPV tests to code the histology.

Code as SCC, NOS (8070/3) in both examples as no HPV testing was performed on the LEEP procedure specimens that identified the SCC.

Pituitary microadenoma is reportable. Assign 8272/0. "Micro" refers to size of the adenoma. 

Per the SEER Program Coding and Staging Manual 2022, a reportable intracranial or CNS neoplasm identified only by diagnostic imaging is reportable, and "consistent with" is listed on the Ambiguous Terms to be used for Reportability list. As a result, this case is reportable.

Update August 2026:

See SINQ 20240038 for an update. This original answer no longer applies.

This case does not fall into the standard rules. WHO criteria for diagnosing pituitary adenoma have recently changed (per 5th Ed WHO CNS book) and we will likely see more PitNET’ s than pituitary adenomas in the future. PitNET may be invasive or non-invasive but the likelihood of the pathologists providing this information is low. Since we don’t know if the 2018 adenoma was a PitNET based on current criteria or if it transformed to the malignant neoplasm, err on the side of caution and abstract a second primary per M5.

This issue is new, and we’ve received numerous questions concerning pathologist reviewing older cases of pituitary adenoma and reclassifying them as PitNET using the new criteria.

Abstract multiple primaries using the Solid Tumor Rules, Other Sites, Rule M13.  The topography differs at the second and third characters (C54.1 Endometrium; C15 Esophagus).  Rule M12 refers to being disease-free vs. recurrence of a tumor, where Note 1 states that clinically disease-free means no evidence of recurrence in the same site on follow up.

A note can be added to clarify that M12 applies to new tumors in the SAME site.

Answer updated April 2025

A change in the subcategory for a hormone drug does not indicate the end of First Course of Treatment because different hormone therapies generally achieve the same result. For example, some forms of breast cancer are estrogen-dependent and the various subcategories of hormone drugs used to treat them, such as gonadotropin-releasing factor agonists, aromatase inhibitors and estrogen antagonists, all achieve the same result - to block estradiol effects in these tumors.

Similarly, a change in immunotherapy is not a new course of treatment.

However, if a change to hormone therapy or immunotherapy is due to a change in the patient's ER, PR, or Her2 status, this could signify a new course of treatment.

The instruction in the SEER Manual is specific to chemotherapy. Chemotherapy is the only systemic treatment for which a change in the subcategory of a drug indicates the end of First Course of Treatment, due to the fact that different chemical agents damage cancer cells in different ways and at different phases in the cell cycle.

Accession two primaries, adenocarcinoma (8140/3) of the prostate and SmCC (8041/3) of the prostate using Rule M4 of the current Other Sites Solid Tumor Rules.  The guidance in the aforementioned SINQ entries still applies with the additional criteria of being diagnosed more than one year following the diagnosis of acinar adenocarcinoma, or subtype, of the prostate as stated in Rule M4 of the updated 2023 rules. Small cell carcinomas of the prostate are often diagnosed on follow-up TURP/biopsies; however, if a patient had a previous radical prostatectomy, the small cell carcinoma would be identified in a metstatic site and would still be a new prostate primary. This includes biopsy confirmed metastatic tumors only. It remains important to capture the two distinct histology types.

Table 19 is based on WHO 5th Ed Tumors of vulva and squamous cell variants, keratinizing and non-keratinizing, are no longer recommended and are excluded from the 5th Ed. HPV related terminology is now preferred for these neoplasms.

Per consultation with our GYN expert pathologist, based on the information provided, this is likely a single tumor that was not completely excised in the original biopsy. A new tumor in the same site would not appear within 8 months. If you cannot confirm two separate/non-contiguous tumors were present, abstract a single primary per M1. As for histology, the tumor showed both keratinizing and non-keratinizing features and HPV status is unclear. Per our expert, code to SCC 8070/3—keratinization or lack of does not change treatment or prognosis.

Even If there is proof of separate/non-contiguous tumors, our expert still feels this is a single primary coded to SCC 8070/3. Treatment does not differ by keratinization or HPV status. Coding two primaries would be incorrect and inflate incidence rates.

Per our expert, this is an unusual occurrence. The rules cover 85% of cases but there will always be situations that do not fit a rule. This case is an example of that.  A new GYN specific Solid Tumor Rules module is under development and a rule to address this situation could be included.

For a primary endometrial or ovarian cancer, record the oophorectomy/BSO procedure using the appropriate Surgery of Primary Site code that includes oophorectomy/BSO when done as part of first course of treatment (surgical resection). If performed for hormone effect, also record in the Hematologic Transplant and Endocrine Procedures data item.  For other primary sites whose Surgery of Primary Site codes do not include oophorectomy/BSO, record it in the Hematologic Transplant and Endocrine Procedures data item when performed for hormone effect.  Document information in the appropriate text fields.

Candidates for risk-reducing BSO may include those with hereditary syndromes (such as BRCA mutations) or genes that carry a substantially increased lifetime risk of ovarian malignancy or hormone-sensitive cancers including estrogen-dependent cancers, like breast cancer, ovarian cancer and endometrial (uterine) cancer that rely on estrogen to develop and grow.