Reportability--Hematopoietic, NOS: Is a "myeloproliferative disorder" reportable when the pathology report comment states this likely represents the "early/cellular phase of myelofibrosis/myeloid metaplasia" with cytogenetics and PCR pending?
For cases diagnosed prior to 1/1/2010:This case is not yet reportable. The bone marrow diagnosis "myeloproliferative disorder" is not reportable to SEER. It is likely that if this condition progresses, it will eventually be reportable.
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.
CS Extension--Prostate: Can the EOD Manual clarifications regarding apparent and inapparent tumors be used to determine CS clinical extension for prostate primaries?
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.Do not use the EOD information to determine apparent and inapparent when coding Collaborative Stage for tumors diagnosed 1/1/2004 or later.
The August 2007 CoC Flash stated that "After consultation with the AJCC curators for genitourinary disease, the CS Steering Committee has determined that the SEER list of terms for apparent and inapparent in the SEER Extent of Disease Manual is NOT to be used for interpreting reports for Collaborative Staging. While it was a convenient tool for registrars, the curators are of the opinion that the use of the list will lead to misinterpretation of reports. Rather, the curators recommend that registrars rely on a direct physician statement of apparent or inapparent disease for Collaborative Staging."
August 2007 CoC Flash: http://www.facs.org/cancer/cocflash/august07.pdf, Coding Prostate Cancer: A Message from the Collaborative Staging Steering Committee.
CS Tumor Size--Breast: How is this field coded for a 1.5 cm clinically palpable tumor that appeared to be a cyst with a papilloma when the partial mastectomy Path Micro stated the lesion was an "intraductal papilloma with focal noninvasive papillary carcinoma"? See Discussion.
Should the size be coded to 999 [unknown] because the noninvasive papillary carcinoma is described only as "focal" and is not measured and it is not known how much of the tumor is benign and how much is in situ. Or would the size be coded to the size of the palpable mass, 1.5 cm?
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 tumor size as 999 [unknown]. Size of the focal noninvasive papillary carcinoma is not stated.
Primary Site--Bladder: What subsite is used for fundus of the bladder?
As of November 2005, Code fundus of bladder to C678 [overlapping lesion of bladder]. Opinions vary regarding the definition of bladder "fundus." However, according to our pathologist consultant, fundus includes posterior, anterior and lateral walls and dome. Fundus does not include the trigone.
A correction to page C-595 of the 2004 SEER manual will be included in the next errata.
CS Reg LN Pos/Exam--Breast: How are nodes positive/examined coded for a positive FNA of a lymph node followed by a subsequent lymph node dissection? See Discussion.
A breast cancer patient had an FNA of an axillary lymph node positive for metastases. A modified radical mastectomy with lymph node dissection showed six lymph nodes negative for metastases.
Example 1: Patient received neoadjuvant chemotherapy prior to mastectomy and lymph node dissection.
Example 2: Patient received no neoadjuvant therapy.
This question is answered for EOD in SINQ 20031059. What is the answer for Collaborative Stage?
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.Include all nodes examined by the pathologist in Regional lymph nodes positive and Regional lymph nodes examined, unless there is disease progression. These fields are cumulative -- record the total number of regional nodes positive and examined during first course of treatment. Preoperative treatment does not affect the coding of these fields.
An FNA alone, positive for regional lymph node metastasis is coded as 95 for number positive and 95 for number examined.
For the case examples above, assuming there has been no disease progression, include all nodes positive and all nodes examined from both the FNA and the lymph node dissection in the counts. Code number of regional nodes positive as 01, number examined as 07 for both examples.
Primary Site/CS Tumor Size/CS Extension--Lung: How are these fields coded when a chest CT for lung cancer documents multiple masses in different lobes of the lung? See Discussion.
Example
Chest CT: "Almost complete consolidation of RUL and superior segment of RLL, highly suspicious for malignancy and represents primary bronchogenic carcinoma until proven otherwise. Multiple pulmonary masses bilaterally consistent with metastatic disease."
The physician describes multiple masses throughout RLL and LLL of lung suspicious for met disease, particularly lesion in LLL measuring 2.5 cm. The 2 cm mass in right lung abuts pleura, another mass in RLL measures 2.5 cm, smaller nodules in RLL and another 1 cm lesion abuts the pleura. Bx of a rt supraclavicular LN is positive for met carcinoma c/w lung primary.
Would primary site be coded to RLL because the scan states that the lesions on the right side represent primary bronchogenic carcinoma until proven otherwise and the 2.5 cm lesion in the RLL is the location of the largest tumor on the right? Or should site be coded to right lung, NOS and size to unknown because there is no clear statement as to which lesion on the right represents the primary tumor? If the site is lung, NOS, would CS Extension be coded to 65 to describe the multiple nodules in the RLL?
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.Based on the information provided:
Code primary site C349 [Lung]. Code laterality 1 [Right]. Code CS Tumor Size 999 [Unknown]. Code CS Extension 65 [Separate tumor nodules, same lobe]. Code CS Mets at Dx 39 [Separate tumor nodule in contralateral lung].
Reportability/Primary Site--Head & Neck: If a wedge resection/shield resection is performed on the lower lip for SCCA and the path report refers to "lip, NOS" with no mention of vermilion border, is this case reportable?
Review the operative and pathology reports, and the physical exam for mention of "mucosal surface" (reportable) or "skin" (not reportable). If neither are mentioned, lip, NOS is reportable per the ICD-O-3 code of C009.
First Course Treatment/Surgery of Primary Site--Lung: How is radiofrequency ablation for lung primaries coded?
Assign code 15 [Local tumor destruction, NOS] in the Surgery of Primary Site field. RFA is a technique where a probe placed in or near a tumor sends radio waves into the tumor, causing it to heat up and kill the cancer cells. RFA doesn't fit neatly into code 12 or 13, so we are left with the NOS code.
CS Extension--Retinoblastoma: When the degree of extension differs between the retinas, how is extension coded for simultaneous bilateral retinoblastoma?
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 the CS extension code that corresponds to the greatest level of extension seen in either eye, excluding information from enucleation.
Record extension based on enucleation in Site Specific Factor 1.
Record bilateral disease under laterality. For retinoblastomas, bilaterality is not a component or consideration for staging.
An official website of the United States government
Home