Reportablility--Breast: Is lobular neoplasia, grade 2 reportable? See Discussion.
Path report reads: Lobular neoplasia, grade 2.
According to the AFIP nomenclature for DCIS (taken from the WHO terminology), this would be the equivalent of LCIS. But nowhere can I find this specifically applies to lobular in the same way that ductal neoplasia is treated.
According to the editors of ICD-O-3, lobular neoplasia grade 2 is not equivalent to LCIS. It is not a reportable term. Lobular neoplasia and lobular intraepithelial neoplasia are equivalent terms having a three grade system. Only LN/LIN grade 3 would be reportable since those terms are analogous to ductal intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3.
CS Extension/CS Mets at Dx--Lung: How are these fields coded for bilateral pleural effusion for a right lung primary? A code of 72 in the CS Extension field leads to a T4, but bilateral pleural effusion is M1. Should CS Mets at Dx be coded 39?
This answer was provided in the context of CSv1 coding guidelines. The response may not be used after your registry database has been converted to CSv2.
For bilateral malignant pleural effusion, code the ipsilateral malignant effusion in CS Extension and the contralateral malignant effusion in CS Mets at Dx. Assuming the bilateral pleural effusion is the furthest extension in this case, code CS Extension to 72 [Malignant pleural effusion]. Code CS Mets at Dx to 40 [Distant mets, NOS].
Histology (Pre-2007)--Colon: Must a case be specifically labeled "familial adenomatous polyposis" or is the mere presence of numerous/multiple polyps sufficient for coding the histology to FAP?
For tumors diagnosed prior to 2007:
The presence of numerous/multiple polyps is not necessarily adenomatous polyposis coli. Adenomatous polyposis is an extreme condition usually characterized by the presence of hundreds of polyps and should be identified as such either clinically or pathologically.
Look for the term "Familial adenomatous polyposis," FAP or one of its synonyms:
Adenomatosis of the colon and rectum [ACR]
Familial adenomatous colon polyposis
Familial colonic polyposis
Multiple familial polyposis
In the absence of these terms, the following probably indicate a diagnosis of FAP:
Hundreds of adenomatous polyps throughout large intestines, and at times, throughout the digestive system
Development of polyps as early as ten years of age, but more commonly at puberty
History of colectomy
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.
Histology (Pre-2007)--Lung: Should "moderately differentiated adenocarcinoma of scar type, intermixed with bronchiolo-alveolar carcinoma" be coded to 8250 [bronchiolo-alveolar adenocarcinoma, NOS] or 8255 [adenocarcinoma of mixed subtypes]?
For tumors diagnosed prior to 2007:
Code Histology to 8255 [Adenocarcinoma with mixed subtypes]. This is a single tumor containing both a scar carcinoma and a bronchiolo-alveolar carcinoma--use 8255. The synonym for 8255 is adenocarcinoma combined with other types of carcinoma (not just subtypes).
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.
Reportability--Bladder: Is "low grade papillary urothelial neoplasm with no evidence of invasion" reportable to SEER?
"Neoplasm" means "new growth," not malignancy. A low grade papillary urothelial NEOPLASM with no evidence of invasion [8130/1] is not reportable to SEER. However, a low grade papillary urothelial CARCINOMA with no evidence of invasion [8130/2] is reportable.
Reportability/Date of Diagnosis--Ovary: Is a patient SEER reportable in 2001 or 2003 if she presented with a diagnosis of papillary serous tumor of low malignant potential [borderline tumor] per the 5/2001 surgery but at the time of the planned second look laparoscopic surgery is stated to have Stage 3A ovarian cancer? See Discussion.
A patient was seen in 5/2001 for large pelvic mass growing from right ovary. After TAH and USO and partial omemtectomy, path diagnosis was papillary serous tumor of low malignant potential (borderline tumor), unruptured. Right ovary and omental implant have identical histologic appearance, except the psammoma body formation and the ovary does not.
Patient does not return for lap as planned in 6-12 months.
In 1/03 she returns to hospital with abdominal pain and has debulking, hemicolectomy and Hartmann's procedure. 1/03 Path report "metastatic papillary serous adenoca." Chart now says "History of stage 3A ovarian cancer."
Yes, this case is reportable in 2003. Malignancy was confirmed in 2003. The diagnosis made in 2001 is not reportable for that year, and was not reviewed or revised according to the information provided.
CS Extension/EOD Extension--Renal Pelvis: Primary site is renal pelvis with direct extension to the rt adrenal gland. What is the correct extension code?
This answer was provided in the context of CSv1 coding guidelines. The response may not be used after your registry database has been converted to CSv2.
Assign CS Extension code 67 [Adrenal gland from renal pelvis] for adrenal extension from renal pelvis -- T4 and regional direct extension.
Ambiguous Terminology/Reportability: Are the terms "bordering on" and "may represent" diagnostic of cancer? See Discussion.
Pathology report states "...florid micropapillary hyperplasia, focally atypical with features bordering on low grade micropapillary ductal carcinoma in situ."
The terms "bordering on" and "may represent" are not diagnostic of cancer. These terms are not on the list of ambiguous terms that constitute a diagnosis of cancer. The diagnosis in the example above is not reportable to SEER.
CS Extension--Bladder: How should this field be coded when the pathology states "papillary transitional cell carcinoma with no invasion into the submucosa or deep muscularis" but there is "focal extension of tumor into bladder diverticula"?
This answer was provided in the context of CSv1 coding guidelines. The response may not be used after your registry database has been converted to CSv2.
Code the CS Extension field to 01 [Papillary transitional cell carcinoma stated to be noninvasive]. Extension into bladder diverticula does not change the code. Diverticula are pouches in the mucosa (mucous membrane).
An official website of the United States government
Home