Home
| Report | Question ID | Question | Discussion | Answer | Year |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
20041055 | Primary Site/Grade, Differentiation, Cell indicator--Lymphoma: Will a Grade, Differentiation code of 6 [B-cell] for a lymphoma coded to primary site C80.9 [unknown] fail edits? See Discussion. | Patient had a large mass in chest wall that was excised and found to be large B cell lymphoma. Scans mentioned no involvement of lymph nodes but indicated nodules in the liver thought to be lymphoma as well. | For cases diagnosed prior to 1/1/2010:The combination of a primary site C809 with a Grade, Differentiation code of 6 when used for a lymphoma will not fail SEER edits. Avoid coding primary site to C809 when possible. Code primary site for the example above to C761 [Chest wall, NOS]. The chest wall is the only area of involvement, except for "liver nodules." Liver is an unlikely primary site for lymphoma. 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. |
2004 |
|
|
20041070 | Primary Site: What would the primary site be for carcinoma of the renal pelvis, status post transplant? Please see details below. See Discussion. | The patient has a renal pelvis urothelial carcinoma confined to the pelvis but is status post renal pelvic transplant of the same renal pelvis. | Code the primary site to renal pelvis [C659]. Code the site in which the primary tumor originated. The transplant status in this example does not affect the primary site. | 2004 |
|
|
20051093 | CS Lymph Nodes/Scope of Regional Lymph Node Surgery--Prostate: When prostate cancer is an incidental finding at cystoprostatectomy for bladder cancer, is the pelvic lymph node dissection coded for the prostate as well as the bladder? | 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, the pelvic lymph node dissection is coded as regional lymph node surgery for both primaries and the nodes are counted in collaborative staging for both primaries. The examination of the pelvic lymph nodes is relevant to both the bladder and the prostatic primaries. |
2005 | |
|
|
20051006 | Multiple Primaries (Pre-2007)/Histology (Pre-2007)--Thyroid: How is histology coded for the tumor(s) that exist when the thyroidectomy addendum diagnosis is "Morphologic and IHC evaluations reveal two tumors: papillary thyroid carcinoma and squamous cell carcinoma." See Discussion. | The original final diagnosis after a thyroidectomy is "papillary carcinoma of the thyroid with an adjacent invasive squamous cell carcinoma, moderately differentiated." Per the additional addendum comment: "The findings can be interpreted in one of 2 different ways. Either there is a collision tumor of papillary thyroid and squamous cell carcinoma (with the squamous cell ca originating at a site other than the thyroid gland.) Or, less likely, there is a malignant squamous differentiation in the papillary thyroid carcinoma." A university hospital consultation report states the diagnosis as: "Spindle cell squamous cell carcinoma arising in association and from papillary carcinoma, predominantly tall cell variant..." Is this 2 thyroid primaries: 8344/3 [papillary carcinoma, tall cell] and 8074/3 [squamous cell carcinoma, spindle cell]? | For tumors diagnosed prior to 2007:
Our pathologist consultant agrees with the consultant's diagnosis. Therefore, abstract this as one primary of the thyroid. Code the histology as 8344 [Papillary tall cell]. This is the most appropriate histology code available for this complex case.
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. |
2005 |
|
|
20051035 | Reportability--Brain and CNS: Does a case of astrogliosis meet the criteria for gliomatosis cerebri? See Discussion. | Case clinically stated to be a glioma of the brain. Pathology from resection states astrogliosis. Anderson's Pathology defines astrogliosis as astrocytic proliferations. Gliomatosis cerebri is defined as diffuse neoplastic transformation of poorly differentiated astrocytes over a wide area; predominantly invovles hemispheric white matter. |
The pathologic diagnosis for this case, astrogliosis, is not reportable to SEER. Take the definitive diagnosis for this case from the pathology report from the resection. The pathology report takes precendence over the clinical diagnosis. | 2005 |
|
|
20051113 | Histology (Pre-2007): What is the difference between code 8244/3 composite carcinoid (combined carcinoid and adenocarcinoma) and 8245/3 adenocarcinoid tumor? | For tumors diagnosed prior to 2007:
Assign code 8244/3 [composite carcinoid] when there is a combination of adenocarcinoma and carcinoid tumor. Assign code 8245/3 [adenocarcinoid] when the diagnosis is exactly "adenocarcinoid."
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. |
2005 | |
|
|
20051082 | 2004 SEER Manual Errata/Grade--Colon/Bones: Is the term "pleomorphic" used to code tumor grade to 3 for selected primaries? | Delete the row containing the word "pleomorphic" from the tables on pages 93, C-219 and C-411. This correction will be included in the next set of replacement pages for the 2004 SEER manual. | 2005 | |
|
|
20051103 | CS Extension/Histology (Pre-2007)--Melanoma: When do the terms "regression is present," "apparent regression," or "undergoing regression" affect the coding of melanoma cases? See Discussion. | For melanoma, many path reports document the presence or absence of regression. At what point does the presence of regression become significant enough to code it for histology and for CS Extension?
Example 1: Skin biopsy showed malignant melanoma, Breslow thickness 0.38 mm, Clark's level II, ulceration is absent, regression is present. Example 2: Punch biopsy showed malignant melanoma, Clark's level II, 0.34-mm maximum depth of invasion, with apparent regression. Example 3: Skin biopsy showed lentigo maligna undergoing regression. |
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 tumors diagnosed prior to 2007:
Regression does not affect CS staging for cutaneous melanoma. "Malignant melanoma, regressing" [8723] is coded only when it is the final diagnosis. Do not use code 8723 for the examples above. According to our pathologist consultant: Melanoma can occasionally undergo "spontaneous" regression -- the tumor can become smaller, and in some cases even disappear. This phenomenon is likely due to an increased immune response on the part of the "host" (person with the melanoma). This is noted occasionally in patients with metastatic disease which gets smaller, or even disappears. We think this is also what has happened in patients who get diagnosed with metastatic melanoma, say in a lymph node, but have no primary tumor, though sometimes give a history of a skin lesion which came and then went away, or a skin lesion which was not submitted for pathological examination. In addition, we (pathologists) occasionally see biopsies which have melanoma as well as the presence of the immune reaction to it, and once in a while, the immune reaction with little or no evidence of residual melanoma. The College of American Pathologists says that regression of 75% or more of the melanoma carries an adverse prognosis.
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. |
2005 |
|
|
20051058 | Primary Site/Histology (Pre-2007)--Rectum: How are rectal biopsies with the histology of "poorly differentiated carcinoma with mixed basaloid and squamous features" coded if, per the SEER site/histology validation table, the histology 8094/3 [basosquamous carcinoma] histology cannot be coded to the rectum for the primary site? | For tumors diagnosed prior to 2007:
Code primary site C209 [rectum] and histology 8094/3 [basosquamous carcinoma]. As of 6/9/2003, this is no longer an impossible site/histology combination.
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. |
2005 | |
|
|
20051027 | Grade, Differentiation--Bladder: If the only indication of grade for a bladder primary is "grade 2, NOS," and we do not know the grading system being used by the pathologist, is the numeric grade 2 coded? | See the General Coding Rules on page 92 of the 2004 SEER Manual for instructions about coding grade. If the only information available is "Grade 2," assign code 2 [Grade II]. |
2005 |
An official website of the United States government
