System Guide
Back to Search Results

Search Results

Display Options
Display Options
Select Fields
Export Results to CSV Create Report 0
+ Add all results to report

Report Produced: 07/07/2025 07:29 AM

Report Question ID Question Discussion Answer Year
20051109 CS Site Specific Factor/Terminology--Breast: Does the term "focal areas" of in situ carcinoma qualify as "minimal" in situ component when coding SSF6 field (assessment of the invasive and in situ components present) in the CS breast scheme?

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 term "focal areas" of in situ carcinoma describes a minimal in situ component.

 2005
20051048 Multiple Primaries (Pre-2007)/Recurrence--Cervix: How many primaries should be abstracted if a patient had a diagnosis in 1998 of adenocarcinoma in situ of the cervix treated with a total hysterectomy and a July 2004 vaginal mass biopsy with a diagnosis of invasive adenocarcinoma that is consistent with an endocervical primary?

For tumors diagnosed prior to 2007:

Abstract the July 2004 diagnosis as a new endocervical primary. Abstract an invasive cancer in the same site more than two months after an in situ cancer as a new primary. Residual cervical tissue is present following a hysterectomy.

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
20051080 Priorities/CS Extension--Lung: In the absence of a physician TNM, is there a hierarchy associated with coding extension when multiple imaging studies demonstrate different degrees of extension? See Discussion. CT of the lung showing primary lesion and other nodules in another lobe or contralateral lung, subpleural nodules, etc. The PET scan did not show activity for the other nodules. What is our "hierarchy" for imaging studies when there is no physician staging?

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.

There is no hierarchy among the various imaging studies. Assign CS extension based on the report documenting the greatest extension.

 2005
20051003 CS Tumor Size/CS Eval--Breast: How are these fields coded when there is a clinical size recorded but the tumor size is not specified on the pathology report associated with a subsequent resection? See Discussion. 4/8/04 excisional biopsy of 1.5 cm palpable mass. Path: gives a specimen size only and states that there is a nodular firm area that correlates with the clustered microcalcification on radiograph. No pathologic tumor size is given. Would the size be coded to the clinical size of 1.5 cm? The patient did have surgery but the only size available is a clinical one. Because the size is clinical, is the CS Eval field coded to 0 [No surgical resection done. Evaluation based on PE...]?

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.

Clinical size can be coded when the patient has had surgery. For the case above, code the tumor size as 015 [1.5 cm] using the clinical information. The CS Tumor Size/Extent Eval field refers to both tumor size and extension. In this case, record the eval field as 0 or 1 (which ever is appropriate). The tumor size sets the T category unless the resection shows skin or chest wall or dermal lymphatic involvement.

 2005
20051053 Reportability/Multiple Primaries (Pre-2007)/Histology--Anus: How many primaries exist if an 11/7/03 anal lesion presents with poorly differentiated adenocarcinoma with signet ring features and extensive mucin production and the 1/9/04 wide excision has adenocarcinoma and Paget disease (intraepidermal adenocarcinoma) extends to skin margin?

For tumors diagnosed prior to 2007:

This is a single primary: the adenocarcinoma with the Paget representing intraepithelial extension of the process. Tumor cells can invade from their place in the epithelium into the underlying stroma either at the primary site, or at their extension site (skin).

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
20051070 CS Lymph Nodes--Breast: Which category has priority when both apply, "Regional lymph nodes, NOS" or "Stated as N_, NOS"? See Discussion. Example: When there is a clinical diagnosis of axillary lymph node metastasis for a breast primary on a physical exam "Enlarged axillary lymph nodes suspicious for metastatic involvement", as well as a clinical N1 designation, do we code as 60 [Axillary LNS, NOS] or 26 [Stated as N1, NOS]?

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 the example provided, assign code 25 [Movable axillary lymph node(s)...] for "Enlarged axillary lymph nodes suspicious for metastatic involvement." Code 60 [Axillary/regional lymph node(s), NOS] is the least specific and would not be used in this case because axillary nodes are defined in code 25. Code 26 is for cases in which "N1, NOS" documented by the physician is the only information available.

 2005
20051068 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.

 2005
20051074 CS Extension/CS Lymph Nodes--Colon: What codes are used when large vessel invasion (V2 grossly evident) is stated to be present on a pathology report? See Discussion.

Example

Cecum, right hemicolectomy: poorly differentiated invasive adenocarcinoma of the cecum. Large vessel invasion (V2-grossly evident) is present. Microscopic description: The grossly described matted lymph node tissue shows an irregular nuclear contour and is classified as V2, grossly evident venous invasion based on staging criteria of the AJCC Cancer Staging Manual, 6th Edition.

Per note 2 in the coding scheme for CS-Extension, a nodule with irregular contour in the pericolic adipose tissue should be coded in CS-Extension to code 45. Is the large vessel invasion described in the path report the same process as a tumor nodule in pericolic fat? Should note 2 be used and CS-Extension coded to 45?

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.The description of large vessel invasion and irregular nuclear contour from the example above describes grossly matted LYMPH NODE tissue. Do not code this in the CS Extension field. Code the CS Lymph Nodes field appropriately based on the rest of the information for this case.

When large vessel invasion and irregular nuclear contour is used to describe a "tumor nodule," rather than a recognizable lymph node, code it in the CS extension field.

 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