First Course Treatment: If a patient makes a blanket refusal of all recommended therapy or refuses all treatment before any therapy was recommended, are only immunotherapy and hematologic/endocrine therapies to be coded as refused (code 87)? Or should all treatment modalities be coded as refused if a patient makes a blanket refusal? Or should none of the treatment modalities be coded as refused because we do not know what would have been recommended? See Discussion.
Coding instructions for immunotherapy and for hematologic/endocrine procedures state that Code 87 is to be assigned if either of the following circumstances apply: 1) If the patient made a blanket refusal of all recommended treatment. 2) If the patient refused all treatment before any was recommended. These instructions are not included for other treatment modalities.
When the patient refuses treatment, the first course of therapy is no treatment. Code all treatments as refused.
EOD-Extension--Breast: If the pathology report states "infiltrating duct carcinoma...measuring 7mm in diameter...focal areas of intraductal carcinoma," do we code this field to 14 [Invasive and in situ components present, size of entire tumor coded in Tumor Size and in situ described as minimal] or to 16 [Invasive and in situ components present, size of entire tumor coded in Tumor Size and proportions of in situ and invasive not known]?
For cases diagnosed 1998-2003: If 7mm is the measurement of the infiltrating duct portion of this cancer, assign extension code 13 [Invasive and in situ components present, size of invasive component stated and coded in Tumor Size].
If 7mm is the size of the whole malignancy and the size of the invasive portion cannot be determined, assign extension code 14 [Invasive and in situ components present, size of entire tumor coded in Tumor Size (size of invasive component not stated) and in situ described as minimal (less than 25%)]. "Focal areas of in situ carcinoma" qualifies as minimal.
Reportability/Behavior Code--Melanoma: If a dermatologist states a "proliferation of atypical melanocytes confined to epidermis" is melanoma in situ, is it reportable to SEER?
For this case only, it is reportable to SEER because the physician states that it is "melanoma in situ."
The phrase "proliferation of atypical melanocytes confined to epidermis" alone is not reportable to SEER. This phrase means that there are a number of (proliferation) pigmented cells (melanocytes) not showing the normal cell structure (atypical).
Reportability--Brain and CNS: Is a skull tumor schwannoma an intracranial reportable benign tumor if the physician states it arose in the occipital nerve?
No. These schwannomas are not intracranial and therefore, are not reportable to SEER. The occipital nerve is not one of the 12 intracranial nerves (i.e., Abducens, Auditory (vestibulocochlear), Facial, Glossopharyngeal, Hypoglossal, Oculomotor, Olfactory, Optic, Spinal Accessory, Trigeminal, Trochlear, and Vagus).
Primary site/Histology (Pre-2007)/Behavior: What is the correct site and histology/behavior for the following diagnosis: "mucinous cystadenoma of the appendix with perforation and pseudomyxoma peritonei." This was diagnosed at e-lap for a separate adenocarcinoma of the ascending colon.
For tumors diagnosed prior to 2007:
The appropriate code for mucinous cystadenoma of the appendix with perforation and pseudomyxoma peritonei is C18.1 8470/0. It is not reportable to SEER. According to our pathologist consultant, mucinous cystadenoma is a legitimate term for such appendiceal tumors. They may implant all over the peritoneum as pseudomyxoma peritonei, especially in the face of perforation, without being histologically malignant.
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.
Ambiguous Terminology/Reportability: Is the phrase "indicative of cancer" SEER reportable?
No. The phrase "indicative of cancer" alone is not a definitive cancer diagnosis. The word "indicative" is not on the list of ambiguous terms that is equivalent to a diagnosis of cancer.
Surgery of Primary Site--Rectum: How do you code a procedure described as a "transanal resection, debulking of a large rectal mass"? See Discussion.
Patient is not a surgical candidate due to "other medical conditions". Colonoscopy done for anemia and rectal bleeding. At the colonoscopy a "Transanal Resection Debulking of large rectal mass" is performed. Two specimens are sent to the lab. The first is labeled "rectal mass" and is a 2.0 cm diameter spherical fragment of tissue. The second is labeled "transanal debulking rectal mass" and is described as multiple, irregular shaped fragments of tan, rubbery tissue measuring 5.0 x 5.0 x 3.0 cm. Final path diagnosis: Debulking of rectal mass: Adenocarcinoma greater than 2 cm in size, resection margins positive for tumor.
For cases diagnosed 1998-2002, code Surgery of Primary Site to 20 [Local tumor excision, NOS]. Because the procedure was performed via colonoscopy and apparently did not involve proctectomy, the best choice is a local excision.
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.
Histology (Pre-2007)--Pancreas: Should pancreatic neoplasia III (PanIN III) be coded to 8010/2 [carcinoma in situ, NOS] or 8500/2 [Ductal carcinoma in situ]? See Description.
There is no specific morphology code for PanIN-III in the ICD-O-3. In the chapter for exocrine pancreas found in the sixth edition of AJCC cancer staging manual, pg 160, reference is made to PanIN-III and its inclusion with carcinoma in situ.
For tumors diagnosed prior to 2007:
Code PanIN-III (pancreatic intraepithelial neoplasia III) as 8500/2 [Ductal carcinoma in situ, includes DIN 3: Ductal intraepithelial neoplasia 3]. PanIN-III is a synonym for carcinoma in situ according to the WHO classification of Tumors and the College of American Pathologists' Protocol for exocrine pancreas. Do not code PanIN-I or PanIN-II as cancer.
For tumors diagnosed 2007 or later, see SINQ 20110081 and 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.
An official website of the United States government
Home