Reportability/Diagnostic Confirmation--Leukemia: What is the diagnostic confirmation if a positive BCR/ABL result is diagnostic of a malignancy in a patient suspected to have chronic myelogenous leukemia? See Discussion.
Example 1: Peripheral smear states: "No morphologic evidence of chronic myelogenous leukemia."
Addendum: Molecular diagnostic studies showed a positive rearrangement for the BCR gene with the M-bcr (CML type) and of bcr-abl transcript expression".
Example 2: Hematopathology is negative.
Molecular diagnostic study: "fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH) studies exceeded the limits established by the XXX Cytogenetics Laboratory for this probe set, and thus, demonstrated statistical evidence of BCR/ABL fusion."
For cases diagnosed prior to 1/1/2010:
Do not determine reportablility using cytogenetics or molecular studies alone.
Since these are not routine screening tests, we suggest that you query the physician and review the medical record to see what prompted the study and what is being done with the result, but the test alone is not in and of itself sufficient to report the case.
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.
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.
Collaborative Staging--Hematopoietic, NOS: Which Collaborative Staging schema is used for a connective, subcutaneous and soft tissue primary of the pelvis [C495] with the morphology of Langerhans cell sarcoma [9756/39]? See Discussion.
On page C-411 of the SEER manual for the connective, subcutaneous, and other soft tissues schema it lists exceptions for certain morphologies and the above is not listed as an exception. On the Hematopoietic scheme it lists the above morphology.
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.Use the hematopoietic schema on page C-709 of the 2004 SEER manual. The histologically defined schemas have priority over the site schemas when both apply. See page 115 of the 2004 SEER manual.
The morphology codes listed on page C-411 pertain to the SEER Site Specific Guidelines.
CS Extension/CS Site Specific Factor--Breast: How is extension (localized or unknown) and SSF6 (entire tumor in situ or 888) coded for an in situ breast primary in which bone metastasis is diagnosed 4 months following the mastectomy? See Discussion.
In situ breast primary with bone mets. No mets work up prior to mastectomy done 2/04. Path: 2.5 cm mass: ductal carcinoma in situ, solid type, with comedonecrosis (no invasive carcinoma found in mastectomy specimen). Bone scan done 4/04 showed compression fractures. MRI 6/04 showed diffuse metastatic disease of the bones.
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.
First, determine whether the bone mets in this case are progression of disease. If the patient was asymptomatic at the time of the mastectomy, the bone mets are disease progression, not initial stage.
If the initial stage includes the bone mets and they are not disease progression, extension must be coded to at least 10. Code site-Specific Factor 6 to 040 [Size of entire tumor coded, size of invasive component not stated].
Reportability/In Situ--Prostate: Was there a time period when PIN III was reportable to SEER?
Per the 2004 SEER Manual, page 2, Reportable Diagnoses, Exceptions, 1.b.iii "Prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia (PIN III) of the prostate (C619). (Collection stopped effective with cases diagnosed 1/1/2001 and later.)"
CS Site Specific Factor--Prostate: Is there an established range of values that can be used to code negative, borderline or elevated PSA values? See Discussion.
Previous SEER prostate coding guidelines listed a PSA range that could be used to code negative, borderline, or elevated values in the absence of any statement concerning elevated PSA in the medical record. Is this still in effect for SSF 2, or do we need a definite statement when only a numeric value is given?
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.
This matter is under consideration by the CS Steering Committee. The CS Steering committee is reviewing options for incorporating SEER guidelines into the CS manual.
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.
An official website of the United States government
Home