Grade, Differentiation/Priorities: Which has priority, the differentiation or the nuclear grade for a liver biopsy histology described as "well differentiated hepatocellular carcinoma, nuclear grade 3/4"?
For most sites, differentiation has priority over the nuclear grade when both are specified (excluding breast and kidney). Assign grade code 1 [well differentiated] to the example above.
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].
2004 SEER Manual Errata/Surgery of Primary Site--Lymphoma: Item 9.a on page 178 is incorrect. Do not assign surgery code 98 to lymphoma, primary in lymph nodes. See Appendix C, page C-707 for Lymphoma (primary in lymph nodes) surgery codes.
Delete item 9. a. i. ii. and iii. on page 178 of the 2004 SEER Manual. This correction will be included in the next errata.
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.
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.
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.
Date of Diagnosis--Sarcoma: Should the date of diagnosis be coded to the date of biopsy or the date of birth for an infant biopsied at 3 days of age and stated to have a diagnosis of congenital alveolar rhabdomyosarcoma, widely metastatic?
Code the date of the biopsy as the date of diagnosis. This is the date the cancer was first identified by a medical practitioner.
Note: SEER collects the Month and Year of diagnosis. The "day" of diagnosis is not collected by SEER.
Multiple Primaries--Lymphoma: How many primaries should be reported when there is a marginal zone B-Cell lymphoma [9699/3] diagnosed in 2000, and the clinician states that the diffuse large B-Cell type lymphoma [9680/3] diagnosed in 2004 was a transformation of the prior primary? See Discussion.
The Single Versus Subsequent Primaries of Lymphatic and Hematopoietic Diseases table indicates they are most likely "D" different disease processes. As any low grade lymphoma can transform, we suspect this represents a transformation (the clinician is regarding this as transformed).
How many primary/ies should be coded?
And, how?
For cases diagnosed prior to 1/1/2010:
Report this case as one primary according to the physician's opinion. Code the histology as 9699/3 [marginal zone B-Cell lymphoma, NOS] and code the date of diagnosis as 2000.
Code the physicians opinion regardless of whether or not it agrees with the Single Versus Subsequent Primaries of Lymphatic and Hematopoietic Diseases table. Use the table when the physician does not state whether or not there is a new primary.
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/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.
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.
An official website of the United States government
Home