SEER Inquiry System - Search

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.

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.

For cases diagnosed prior to 1/1/2010:Abstract the example above as two primaries. Hematologic malignancies (including lymphoma) and solid tumors are handled differently when determining the number of primaries. For hematologic malignancies, take the physician's opinion into account. Use the Single Versus Subsequent Primaries of Lymphatic and Hematopoietic Diseases table as an aid when there is insufficient information available.

For solid tumors, follow the multiple primary rules in the SEER Program Code Manual.

For cases diagnosed 2010 forward, refer to the Hematopoietic and Lymphoid Neoplasm Case Reportability and Coding Manual and the Hematopoietic Database (Hematopoietic DB) provided by SEER on its website to research your question. If those resources do not adequately address your issue, submit a new question to SINQ.

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.

Yes. Code CS Extension-Clinical Extension to 15 [Tumor identified by needle biopsy, e.g., for elevated PSA (clinically inapparent)] for clinically inapparent prostate cancer with positive apex biopsy.

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 CS Extension as 05 [Benign or borderline brain tumors]. Code the size of the tumor if specified. Otherwise code CS Tumor Size as 999 for benign CNS tumors.

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.

For tumors diagnosed prior to 2007:

Abstract two primaries. This is an example of two tumors with different histologic types in the same site. The right kidney has two separate tumors.

8310/3 [renal cell carcinoma (clear cell type)]

8320/3 [renal cell carcinoma (granular cell type)]

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.

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.

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.