Surgery of Primary Site--Breast: How is the surgery field coded when an excisional biopsy that is originally stated to be negative is later determined to be positive on ROS and a mastectomy with negative findings is performed 2 years later? See Discussion.
Hospital 'A' performed a breast biopsy and found only atypia. Two years later Hospital 'B' re-read the first biopsy as multifocal ductal carcinoma in situ, cribriform type. A mastectomy at Hospital 'B' followed and all specimens from this were negative.
Do we report the procedure at Hospital 'A' an excisional biopsy, despite the negative findings at the time?
For hospital A, follow the instructions in the 2004 SEER Manual on page 5, #4. For hospital B, the case is not reportable.
The diagnosis date is the date of first excision. Code the breast excision from Hospital A as surgery, first course treatment. The mastectomy was not part of first course treatment.
CS Extension/CS Mets at Dx--Pineal Gland: In Collaborative Stage, how is positive cerebral spinal fluid coded?
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 Mets at DX code 40 [Distant metastases] for a pineal gland primary with positive cerebral spinal fluid.
Primary Site--Peritoneum: During a second look staging lap following a diagnosis of serous carcinoma of the left ovary, did the physician correctly indicate a new peritoneum, NOS primary for disease described as an endometrioid adenocarcinoma in a "paracaval cyst" that appears to have arisen in endometriosis?
The primary site is C482 [Peritoneum, NOS]. "Paracaval" means alongside or near the vena cava.
Code the site in which the primary tumor originated.
CS Eval--Ovary: How is CS Mets Eval coded when the patient has positive pleural effusion confirmed by cytology?
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 Mets Eval for the example above 3 [path exam of metastatic tissue] assuming there has been no pre-treatment. Positive cytology is required for confirmation of pleural effusion for an ovarian primary.
CS Reg LN Pos/Exam--Colon: For a patient with both a prostate and colon primary, if the pathology report indicates that 2 of the 3 regional lymph nodes to the colon are positive for a prostate malignancy, how should these fields be coded for the colon primary?
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 colon primary, code Reg LN Pos 00 [all nodes negative]. Code Reg LN Exam 03 [three nodes examined].
Three lymph nodes were examined and found to be negative for metastatic colon cancer.
Reportability/AmbiguousTerminology: Because there is a caveat in the SEER PCM, 3rd edition to ignore adverbs such as "strongly" when assessing reportability, should a term such as "likely" cancerous be reportable given than the expression "most likely" cancerous is reportable?
"Likely cancerous" is NOT reportable.
The CoC, NPCR and SEER have agreed to a strict interpretation of the ambiguous terms list. Terms that do not appear on the list are not diagnostic of cancer.
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.
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.
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.
Date of Diagnosis--Lung: Should the diagnosis date be coded to the date of the scan or the date of the resection when there is a negative biopsy that occurs between the two procedures? See Discussion.
11/2003 CT chest: 2 cm LLL mass should be considered carcinoma until proven otherwise.
2/2004 CT Chest: stable LLL mass still consistent with primary or metastatic lung neoplasm
11/2004 CT chest: LLL mass suspicious for slow growing carcinoma
3/2005 FNA L lung: atypical cells
4/2005 L lobectomy: well-diff adenocarcinoma
Code the date of diagnosis as 11/2003. A clinical diagnosis was made on 11/2003 and this is the earliest date of diagnosis for this case.
An official website of the United States government
Home