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: 02/26/2026 07:42 AM

Report Question ID Question Discussion Answer Year
20000842

Surgery of Primary Site--Skin: Explain the difference between code 30 and code 45.

Code 30 [Biopsy of primary tumor followed by a gross excision of the lesion]

Code 45 [Wide excision or re-excision of lesion or minor (local) amputation with margins more than 1 cm, NOS. Margins MUST be microscopically negative.]

 For cases diagnosed 1/1/2003 and after: Code 30 represents a biopsy or excision in which the margins of excision are less than 1 cm or the margins are unknown. Code 45 represents a wide excision in which it is known that the margins of excision are greater than 1 cm. 2000
20000486 EOD-Pathologic Review of Number of Regional Lymph Nodes Positive and Examined/Surgical Procedure of Other Site--Kaposi Sarcoma: How do you code these fields for a groin mass excision containing 4 lymph nodes for a Kaposi sarcoma case that presented with multiple skin lesions?

Code the EOD-Pathologic Review of Number of Regional Lymph Nodes Positive and Examined fields to 99 99 for Kaposi cases that present systemically and for those that present in more than one site (which includes cases with more than one skin subsite involved at diagnosis). There are no "regional" lymph nodes for such cases. This represents a majority of currently diagnosed Kaposi cases. However, for localized Kaposi cases, you can count the number of regional lymph nodes positive and examined if the primary site selected has a regional lymph node chain(s) associated with it (e.g., soft palate, hard palate, or a skin subsite).

For cases diagnosed 1/1/2003 and after: Code the groin mass excision in the Surgical Procedure of Other Site field to 1 [Non-primary surgical procedure performed; Non-primary surgical resection to other site(s), unknown if whether the site(s) is regional or distant].

 2000
20000844 EOD-Pathologic Review of Number of Regional Lymph Nodes Positive and Examined--Colon: What codes are used to represent these fields when the pathology from a colon cancer resection describes 2/16 positive pericolonic lymph nodes and a "metastatic nodule in the pericolonic fat"?

For cases diagnosed 1998-2003:

Code the Number of Regional Lymph Nodes Positive field to 03 and the Number of Regional Lymph Nodes Examined field to 17. Each grossly detectable nodule in the pericolonic fat is counted as one regional lymph node.

 2000
20000270

EOD-Lymph Nodes--Lung: What code is used to represent this field when the only information is a description of:

1. "hilar mass"

2. "mediastinal mass"

3. "enlarged" or "greater than 1 cm" used to describe any of the lymph nodes listed under code 2 in the EOD Lymph Nodes field?

For cases diagnosed 1998-2003:

Code EOD-Lymph Nodes fields as follows for the examples given:

1) 9 [Unknown; not stated] for a "hilar mass"

2) 2 [Mediastinal] for a "mediastinal mass"

3) 2 [Mediastinal] for "enlarged" or "greater than 1 cm," if used to describe any of the named lymph nodes listed under code 2 in the EOD-Lymph Nodes field.

 2000
20000261 EOD-Extension--Lymphoma: What code is used to represent a non-Hodgkin lymphoma presenting with involvement of an extralymphatic organ and lymph nodes on the opposite side of the diaphragm? For cases diagnosed 1998-2003: Code the EOD-Extension field to 31 [30 + localized involvement of an extralymphatic organ or site; Stage III E]. 2000
20000280 Primary Site--Breast: Is there a hierarchy for coding subsite for breast cases when there is conflicting information in the physical exam, mammogram, operative and pathology reports as to the exact location of the primary? See discussion.

Example: Two mammograms were performed. One report indicates the lesion is at 12:00 and the other indicates it is in the upper central quadrant. However, the pathology report from the modified radical mastectomy specimen indicates the mass is in the UIQ.

According to one of our physicians, when a pathologist has a mastectomy specimen with attached axillary contents, the location of the lesion (subsite) is very accurate.

Code the Primary Site field to C50.2 [upper inner quadrant]. In general, the priority for using information is pathologic, operative, and clinical findings. The pathology report would take precedence in this case.

The 2004 SEER Program Code manual will include the following instructions for determining breast subsite.

Priority Order for Coding Subsites

Use the information from reports in the following priority order to code a subsite when the medical record contains conflicting information:

1 Pathology report

2 Operative report

3 Physical examination

4 Mammogram, ultrasound

If the pathology proves invasive tumor in one subsite and insitu tumor in all other involved subsites, code to the subsite involved with invasive tumor.

 2000
20000248 Date of Diagnosis: When doing follow-back at nursing homes on DCO cases, we find it difficult to code diagnosis date because the nursing home records are often vague or incomplete. Should the diagnosis date be coded as unknown (excluded from SEER database), the date of death, or the approximate date of diagnosis as reported on the death certificate?

If the nursing home record indicates that the patient had cancer, use the best approximation for date of diagnosis.

If the record says the patient had cancer when admitted, but it does not provide a date of diagnosis, use the date of admission as the date of diagnosis.

If there is no mention of cancer in the nursing home record and/or all work-up in the record is negative, assume the cancer was discovered at autopsy. Use the date of death as the date of diagnosis, and leave as a Death Certificate Only case.

 2000
20000535 EOD-Pathologic Extension--Prostate: Is extracapsular extension implied by the following phrases: "case staged as C" and "case staged as T3a"? See discussion.

Example: A prostatectomy was done on 6/29. The physician staged the case as a "C" on 7/2 and as T3a on 8/6. It appears the physician is interpreting the following pathology information as unilateral extracapsular extension: "The tumor on the right extends to the inked surface of the gland. In this area the capsule appears absent." Should pathologic extension be coded to unilateral extracapsular extension [42]?

For cases diagnosed 1998-2003:

Yes. Use the best information available to stage this case. In this case, the best information is the physician's statement that the case is stage T3a. Without any additional information, the EOD-Extension field is coded to 42 [Unilateral extracapsular extension (pT3a)] on the basis of the T3a stage by the MD. When there is a conflict between different staging systems, default to the AJCC stage.

 2000
20000533

EOD-Clinical Extension--Prostate: In the SEER EOD manual, there is a list of terms to distinguish apparent from inapparent tumor for prostate primaries. Are terms in the "maybe" category and are terms not on the list clinically inapparent or clinically apparent when there is no physician staging of the case? See discussion.

The rectal examination states that there is "asymmetrical enlargement of the prostate, firmness over the right lobe" and the physical exam impression is extensive carcinoma of right lobe. A needle biopsy of the right lobe was positive. "Enlarged" is on SEER's list of clinically inapparent terms; "asymmetrical" and "firm, NOS" are on the "maybe" list.

For cases diagnosed 1998-2003:

On the basis of the physical exam impression, code the EOD-Clinical Extension field to 20 [involvement of one lobe, NOS] for this case. Although the medical record did not provide a physician's staging of the case as clinically apparent, the physician did suspect carcinoma prior to the biopsy.

If clarifying stage information is missing and the term is in the "maybe" category or the term is not on the list, then code extension as 30 [localized, NOS] for cases that appear localized.

 2000
20000534 EOD-Clinical Extension--Prostate: In the SEER EOD manual, there is a list of terms to distinguish apparent from inapparent tumor for prostate primaries. If a physician uses a term not currently on the list or if a physician uses a list in the "maybe" category, should we assume the tumor to be clinically inapparent or clinically apparent tumor?

For cases diagnosed 1998-2003:

If the physician used a term not on the clinically apparent/inapparent list, ignore that term and use the best information available from other sources to code the EOD-Extension field.

If clarifying stage information is missing and the term is in the maybe category or the term is not on the list, then code EOD-Extension as 30 [localized, NOS] for cases that appear localized.

 2000