EOD-Extension--Melanoma: Is "erosion" synonymous with "ulceration" for melanoma cases?
For cases diagnosed 1998-2003:
No, do not interpret the term "erosion" as a synonym for "ulceration" when coding the EOD-Extension field for melanoma. According to AJCC's melanoma curator, erosion is not necessarily the same as ulceration.
Primary Site/Histology (Pre-2007): What codes are used to represent site and histology for BSO specimen with a diagnosis, "Left and right adnexa: poorly differentiated serous carcinoma. Comment: The carcinoma occurs as multiple nodules within adnexal soft tissues. Direct involvement of ovaries is not seen, supporting an extraovarian origin." See discussion.
Per our pathologist consultant, the site should be pelvic peritoneum [C481] and the histology is primary serous papillary carcinoma of peritoneum [8461/3]. Does SEER agree?
For tumors diagnosed prior to 2007:
Code the Primary Site to C481 [Specified parts of peritoneum] and the Histology field to 8461/3 [primary serous papillary carcinoma of peritoneum].
For tumors diagnosed 2007 or later, refer to the MP/H rules. If there are still questions about how this type of tumor should be coded, submit a new question to SINQ and include the difficulties you are encountering in applying the MP/H rules.
Measured Thickness--Melanoma: Can in situ melanoma cases have "depth of invasion" coded to something other than 999? See discussion.
Biopsy of the left arm: Melanoma, 0.2mm in thickness. The in situ component extends to a peripheral margin.
For cases diagnosed 1998-2003:
Code the Measured Thickness (depth) field to 020 [0.2 mm] for this case.
In situ disease can have a depth of invasion because the surface epithelium can be of varying depths without the melanoma breaking through the basement membrane.
Histology (Pre-2007): What code is used to represent the histology "poorly differentiated invasive transitional cell carcinoma with extensive squamous and focal glandular differentiation"?
For tumors diagnosed prior to 2007:
Code the Histology field to 8120/33 [transitional cell carcinoma, NOS, poorly differentiated]. The ICD-O-3 does not have a separate code for transitional cell carcinoma with squamous and/or glandular differentiation.
For tumors diagnosed 2007 or later, refer to the MP/H rules. If there are still questions about how this type of tumor should be coded, submit a new question to SINQ and include the difficulties you are encountering in applying the MP/H rules.
Grade, Differentiation--Breast: Is "histological grade" another way of saying "tubule formation" which would result in the following case having a Bloom-Richardson (BR) score of 7 which would be coded to grade 2? See discussion.
Final path diagnosis stated: Invasive ductal ca, histological grade 3/3, nuclear grade 2/3, mitotic index-moderate.
Yes. Code the Grade, Differentiation field to 2 [Grade 2] for this case. This case has a BR score of 7 which converts to a grade of 2. This pathologist seems to be describing the three parts of the BR system: tubule formation, mitotic activity and nuclear grade.
Primary Site--Head & Neck (Middle ear): How do you code site for a skull based tumor consistent with a low grade papillary adenocarcinoma of "endolymphatic sac origin"?
Code Primary Site to C30.1 [Middle ear]. The endolymphatic sac is part of the inner ear labyrinth located with in the petrous portion of the temporal bone.
EOD-Size of Primary Tumor--Cervix: When both a depth and diameter of the tumor are provided and the description of the diameter is provided in a range, how do you code the size of the primary tumor? See discussion.
Path states "microscopic focus of endocervical glands considered invasive adenoca...maximum depth of that focus measures approximately 2 mm. Maximum diameter of that focus measures 3-4 mm."
What size would be coded for this case: 999, 002, 003, or 004?
Code the EOD-Size of Primary Tumor field to 004 [4 mm]. Code the diameter dimension in the EOD-Size of Primary Tumor field and the depth dimension iin the EOD-Extension field. Code the largest number associated if a range is provided for the diameter of the invasive tumor.
If the size of the diameter had not been mentioned, the EOD-Size of Primary Tumor field would have been coded to 001 [microscopic focus or foci only], which ignores the size associated with the depth dimension of the tumor.
Surgery of Primary Site/Surgical Procedure of Other Site--Bladder: What codes are used to represent these fields for a deeply invasive bladder primary treated initially with a TURP (for suspected prostate extension that turns out to be pathologically negative) and a TURB that is subsequently treated with a cystoprostatectomy?
For cases diagnosed 1/1/2003 and after, code:
1. Surgery of Primary Site field to 60 [Radical cystectomy (male only)] because the cystoprostatectomy was the most extensive (definitive) surgery performed to the primary site.
2. Surgical Procedure of Other Site to 2 [Non-primary surgical procedure to other regional sites] based on the TURP.
EOD-Extension--Pancreas: How would you code extension for the following non-surgically treated pancreas primaries? None of these cases has TNM staging to assist with classifying the extent of disease. See discussion.
1) CT scan: Cystic lesion in body of pancreas. Discharge dx: pancreas ca.
2) Discharge dx: CBD obstruction due to probable early ca in head of pancreas.
3) CT scan: mass involves the head and body of the pancreas. No evidence of abdominal mets. Discharge dx: Locally advanced pancreatic ca.
4) H&P: Pt with splenomegaly probably secondary to splenic vein thrombosis and a large ca of the tail of pancreas. Imp: Advanced pancreatic ca of the tail of pancreas. Would you code extension to splenic vein [56]?
5) H&P: Pancreatic ca with extension or mets into porta hepatis. (Would you assume direct extension or mets?)
6) CT scan: Pancreas ca. Significant peritoneal implants. (Would you assume the implants to be related to the pancreas primary and code as involvement?)
For cases diagnosed 1998-2003:
The information provided for these pancreatic primary examples is very limited. Additional information should be sought. If not available, code the EOD-Extension field to:
1) 10
2) 10
3) 10
4) 99
5) Assuming primary in head, body or tail of pancreas, 76
EOD-Pathologic Review of Number of Regional Lymph Nodes Examined: What code is used to represent this field when a path report from a lymph node biopsy or dissection describes lymph node "portions" or "fragments"? See discussion.
1) Lymph nodes, right pelvic dissection: No evidence of malignancy in 4 portions of lymph node examined. (Should we code the number examined as 01, 04, or 97?)
2) Lymph nodes, left pelvic dissection: 5 fragments of lymph nodes show no evidence of malignancy. (Should we code the number examined as 05 or 97?)
3) Biopsy of right neck mass: Malignancy in fragments of lymph nodes. The following month, pt had a right modified lymph node dissection: 16/32 lymph nodes are positive for malignancy. (Should we code the number examined as 32, 33, 97, 98?)
For cases diagnosed 1998-2003:
The total number of lymph nodes examined is recorded in EOD-Num of Reg LN Examined. If the number of actual lymph nodes represented by the "fragments" or "portions" cannot be determined, assign code 96, 97, or 98 as appropriate.
1) Based on the terminology "four portions of lymph node (singular)" code to 01 despite "dissection" terminology.
2) Code to 97 based on "fragments of lymph nodes (pleural)" terminology and procedure identified as dissection.
3) Code to 97 based on statement of "fragments of lymph nodes (pleural)" for biopsy plus dissection.
An official website of the United States government
Home