Home
| Report | Question ID | Question | Discussion | Answer | Year |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
20061020 | Multiple Primaries (Pre-2007)/Histology (Pre-2007)--Breast: For cases diagnosed in 2005, if a specimen contains an invasive 4.5 cm lobular carcinoma of the right breast and also has a tiny focus of intraepidermal tumors cells [Paget disease of nipple], how many cases should be abstracted and how should the histology field(s) be coded? | For tumors diagnosed prior to 2007:
There are two primaries in this example:
1. Invasive lobular carcinoma [8520/3] 2. In situ Paget disease of nipple [8540/2].
There is no combination code for lobular carcinoma and Paget disease.
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. |
2006 | |
|
|
20061091 | Reportability--Ovary: Is an "aggressive adult granulosa cell tumor with one of two lymph nodes positive for metastatic granulosa cell tumor" reportable? |
Malignant granulosa cell tumor is reportable. The case described above is malignant as proven by metastasis to the lymph node. |
2006 | |
|
|
20061094 | Ambiguous terminology: Does the phrase "considered to be" represent ambiguous terminology when modifying a reportable term? |
A tumor considered to be malignant is reportable. "Considered to be" is an UNambiguous term. |
2006 | |
|
|
20061085 | Histology (Pre-2007)--Breast: Is histology coded from the more representative specimen or should the combination code 8522/3 [Infiltrating duct and lobular carcinoma] be used for a case in which a right breast mass needle core biopsy revealed infiltrating ductal ca, grade III and the subsequent right mastectomy revealed a 2.3 cm lobular carcinoma? | For tumors diagnosed prior to 2007:
Code the histology using the final diagnosis on the pathology report of the procedure that resected the majority of the primary tumor. In this case, the mastectomy removed more of the tumor than the needle biopsy. The final diagnosis from the mastectomy is infiltrating lobular carcinoma. Code histology to 8520/3 [lobular carcinoma].
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. |
2006 | |
|
|
20061098 | CS Extension/CS Mets: For primary sites within the peritoneum (abdominalpelvic walls) such as stomach, colon, does the presence of malignant ascites affect the coding of CS Extension or CS Mets? | 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 Collaborative Staging system is governed by site-specific coding rules. Refer to each set of site rules rather than looking for a general answer for all sites in peritoneum. In particular, Ovary and Corpus allow malignant ascites to be coded in CS Extension, but not CS Mets at Dx. For each site, both CS Extension and CS Mets at Dx should be checked for the proper field to code malignant ascites. |
2006 | |
|
|
20061034 | Primary Site--Unknown & ill-defined site: Is the primary site code C809 [Unknown primary site] preferred over the use of a site code for an organ system (e.g., biliary tract, NOS) or a specific primary site (e.g., colon, NOS) when these are "favored" but other potential sites "cannot be excluded"? See Discussion. | Case 1 - CT: Mult pulm nodules, bilat pleural effusions; paraaortic, paracaval, celiac lymphadenopathy. Lytic lesions L4&L5. Bx L3: Met pd adenoca. Based on the histopathologic features and the results of the immunostains, cholangiocarcinoma is regarded as the most likely primary. However, other possible primaries include pancreas, stomach, and (remotely) lung. Should primary be coded as C26.9, digestive organ, NOS?
Case 2 - CT: Mult liver masses. Liver Bx: Mod diff adenoca. The most likely primary sites include cholangiocarcinoma, stomach and pancreas. FDx per attending: Met adenocarcinoma to the liver, probably biliary origin. What primary site code do we use?
Case 3 - Admitting Dx: Unknown primary with mets to lungs, liver and cerebellar area. Liver Bx: Met adenoca. The combination of morphological and immunohistochemical staining favor a colon primary. However other possibilities include cholangiocarcinoma and pancreatic ca. Should we code site as C18.9 or C26.9? |
Code the primary site according to the physician's opinion. An ill-defined site code or an NOS code for the organ system is preferred over C809 [Unknown primary site] whenever possible. Code C809 only when there is not enough information to use an ill-defined or NOS code. Case 1 and Case 2 - Assign code C249 [Biliary tract, NOS]. Based on the available information, the physicians believe these are most likely biliary primaries. Case 3 - Assign code C189 [Colon]. According to the available information, the physician believes this is most likely a colon primary. |
2006 |
|
|
20061037 | Multiple Primaries/Histology--Lymphoma: If a gastric biopsy demonstrates large B cell lymphoma arising in a low grade MALT lymphoma, how many tumors should be abstracted and how should the histology field(s) be coded? See Discussion. | Final path for gastric biopsy on 12/2005 is "consistent with malignant lymphoma" and Micro says "morphologic findings consistent with MALT lymphoma and an increased proportion of large atypical cells is concerning for large cell transformation. However, since the large cells are present only focally, a definitive diagnosis of large cell lymphoma cannot be rendered" A second gastric biopsy a week later said: Final Path: Diffuse large B cell lymphoma arising in low grade MALT lymphoma. Micro says: "Compared to patient's previous biopsy...the current specimen contains a higher percentage of large atypical cells which stain positively for CD79a, a B cell marker. The morphologic and immunohistochemical findings are consistent with a large B cell lymphoma arising in a low grade MALT lymphoma." These are different primaries according to the table of single versus subsequent primaries of lymphatic and hematopoietic diseases. |
For cases diagnosed prior to 1/1/2010: This is one primary. Code as 9699 [Marginal zone B-cell lymphoma, NOS]. The first biopsy was not conclusive. The biopsy one week later was more definitive. The reports are describing a difference between specimens, not a difference in disease. According to the WHO classification, extranodal marginal zone B-cell lymphoma of mucosa-associated lymphoid tissue (MALT lymphoma) is an extranodal lymphoma with B-cells, cells resembling monocytoid cells, small lymphocytes and scattered immunoblast and centroblast-like cells. 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. |
2006 |
|
|
20061017 | CS Eval--Prostate: How is CS Ts/Ext Eval to be coded for a clinically inapparent prostate cancer that is treated with Lupron and a subsequent prostatectomy? See Discussion. | Patient diagnosed with prostate cancer on biopsy for elevated PSA, CS extension code 15. Patient then receives 4 courses of Lupron. Subsequent radical prostatectomy shows bilateral lobe involvement with capsule invasion, SSF 3 pathologic extension code 032. | 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 TS/Ext Eval 6 [surgical resection performed with pre-surgical systemic treatment, tumor size/ext based on path evidence]. For prostate, CS TS/Ext eval must reflect coding of CS extension and SSF 3. In this case, SSF 3 code 032 is based on the prostatectomy information which occurred after systemic treatment. |
2006 |
|
|
20061038 | Treatment, NOS: Is Bromocriptine coded to hormone or "other" treatment for a pituitary primary that is not surgically treated? | Yes, code bromocriptine as hormone treatment for pituitary adenoma, as it suppresses the production of prolactin that causes the adenoma to grow. | 2006 | |
|
|
20061107 | Histology (Pre-2007)/Flag--Pancreas: How is histology coded given that 8046 [non-small cell carcinoma] of the pancreas is not on the SEER Site/Type validation listing? | For tumors diagnosed prior to 2007:
Assign 8046 [non-small cell carcinoma] for "non-small cell carcinoma" of the pancreas. If necessary, override any site/type edits.
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. |
2006 |
An official website of the United States government
