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: 07/15/2025 15:20 PM

Report Question ID Question Discussion Answer Year
20000277 Ambiguous Terminology: Should SEER's lists of ambiguous terminology be modified to reflect how pathologists and radiologists actually use these terms? See discussion. Pathologists and radiologists say the term "suggestive" is used to describe a lesion that may be malignant, and the term "suspicious" is not used to describe lesions that may be malignant. According to the physician director of our Breast Center the FDA governs the use of terminology, and the term "highly suggestive" instead of "highly suspicious" must be used if there is a greater chance that a mass is malignant.

We recognize that the way clinicians and registrars speak is often different, and that the differences vary from region to region.

Our Medical Advisory Board reviewed the lists of ambiguous terminology before they were included in the third edition of the SEER EOD and the SEER Program Coding and Staging Manual 2004. Since that time, specific terminology has been mandated for describing mammography results. We know some of these terms are discrepant with our ambiguous terminology list.

As of 2007, the standard setters (CoC, NPCR, SEER and CCCR) all use the same ambiguous terminology list. Changes to the list must be approved by the NAACCR Uniform Data Standards Committee.

 2000
20000487 Primary Site--Kaposi Sarcoma: Would the following Kaposi primaries be examples of cases not coded to skin for primary site? See discussion.

1. KS developed initially as a lesion in the oral cavity and followed by the appearance of skin lesions.

2. KS found in a resected parotid gland with metastasis to the parotid gland lymph node. No skin lesions identified.

3. KS discovered in a biopsied 3 cm axillary lymph node. Clinically, the patient had hepatosplenomegaly, ascites, and extensive mesenteric lymph nodes. (No mention of skin.)

Code the Primary Site field as follows:

1. C44.9 [Skin, NOS] as the default value when lesions develop simultaneously in skin and non-skin areas.

2. C07.9 [Parotid gland]

3. C44.9 [Skin, NOS] as the default value when there is no mention of lesions in the skin or other primary site.

Edward Klatt states in Practical AIDS Pathology, "...Visceral Kaposi (involving one or more internal organ sites) is also present in three-fourths of cases, but may not be diagnosed prior to autopsy. Visceral involvement frequently includes the lung, lymph nodes and gastro-intestinal tract."

 2000
20000421 Surgery of Primary Site/Reconstruction-First Course--Breast: If the plan is to "reconstruct" the breast 6 months after an ipsilateral modified radical mastectomy, is the time span a problem or should it be coded in the Surgery of Primary Site field because it was planned? For cases diagnosed 1/1/2003 and after: Code the Surgery of Primary Site field to 55 [Modified radical mastectomy WITHOUT removal of uninvolved contralateral breast, Implant]. The time span is not a problem as long as the reconstruction was planned as first course, which is indicated by tissue expander insertion at the time of the original surgery. 2000
20000280 Primary Site--Breast: Is there a hierarchy for coding subsite for breast cases when there is conflicting information in the physical exam, mammogram, operative and pathology reports as to the exact location of the primary? See discussion.

Example: Two mammograms were performed. One report indicates the lesion is at 12:00 and the other indicates it is in the upper central quadrant. However, the pathology report from the modified radical mastectomy specimen indicates the mass is in the UIQ.

According to one of our physicians, when a pathologist has a mastectomy specimen with attached axillary contents, the location of the lesion (subsite) is very accurate.

Code the Primary Site field to C50.2 [upper inner quadrant]. In general, the priority for using information is pathologic, operative, and clinical findings. The pathology report would take precedence in this case.

The 2004 SEER Program Code manual will include the following instructions for determining breast subsite.

Priority Order for Coding Subsites

Use the information from reports in the following priority order to code a subsite when the medical record contains conflicting information:

1 Pathology report

2 Operative report

3 Physical examination

4 Mammogram, ultrasound

If the pathology proves invasive tumor in one subsite and insitu tumor in all other involved subsites, code to the subsite involved with invasive tumor.

 2000
20000440 Grade, Differentiation--Brain and CNS: Can grade IV be implied for brain primaries with the histology of glioblastoma multiforme, even if there is no statement of grade in the path report? See discussion. Dr. Platz has instructed the Iowa registry to code glioblastoma multiforme to grade IV, even when there is no corroborating statement of grade in the path report. This is also supported in some references. Code the Grade, Differentiation field to 9 [Cell type not determined, not stated or not applicable] in the absence of a stated grade on the pathology report. If a grade is stated, code the stated grade. SEER does not recommend adopting the rule in the Discussion. 2000
20000542 EOD-Lymph Nodes/TNM--Breast: Do we code these lymph nodes fields for a breast primary that describes ipsilateral axillary lymph node involvement as "extending through the lymph node capsule and into perinodal soft tissue/fat" as "fixed/matted"?

For cases diagnosed 1998-2003:

Code the EOD-Lymph Nodes field to 6 [Axillary regional lymph nodes, NOS], if the size of the metastasis within the lymph node is not known. "Extension into perinodal soft tissue" does not imply that the lymph nodes are fixed to one another or to other structures. AJCC stage for lymph nodes is coded to N1 [Metastasis to moveable ipsilateral axillary lymph nodes].

In order to code the EOD-Lymph Nodes field to 5 [Fixed/matted ipsilateral axillary nodes] which is the equivalent to AJCC equivalent N2, there must be some clinical or pathologic statement of fixation or matting. There can be extension through the capsule without fixation or matting. "Fixation" is a clinical term and "matting" can be either clinical or pathologic. A pathologist can recognize two or more lymph nodes stuck together by tumor.

 2000
20000469 Reason for No Cancer-Directed Surgery--Lung: How do you code this field for a lung primary that presents with metastasis to the bone and brain in which the oncologist's treatment plan includes only radiation and chemotherapy? Code the Reason for No Cancer-Directed Surgery field to 1 [Cancer-Directed Surgery Not Recommended]. 2000
20000512 EOD-Extension/EOD-Lymph Nodes--Kaposi Sarcoma: What code is used to represent this field for a Kaposi sarcoma with no skin lesions but positive lymph node and bone marrow biopsies?

Code the EOD-Extension field to 13 [Visceral (e.g., pulmonary, gastrointestinal tract, spleen, other)], because of the positive bone marrow. Code the EOD-Lymph Nodes field to 3 [Both clinically enlarged palpable lymph nodes (adenopathy) and pathologically positive lymph nodes], for the pathologically positive node.

Note: Potential revision of the extension scheme will be referred to SEER Medical Advisory Group (SMAG).

 2000
20000419 EOD-Extension--Corpus Uteri: How do you code myometrial involvement described as 1) "to the level of the middle one-third" or 2) "superficial"?

For cases diagnosed 1998-2003:

Evaluate each case carefully.

1. Code the EOD-Extension field to 12 [Myometrium-inner half] because the pathology report indicates involvement of the myometrium "to the level of." However, if you feel that you cannot make that determination with certainty and you cannot ask a pathologist for clarification, then code the EOD-Extension field to 14 [Myometrium, NOS].

2. Code the EOD-Extension field to 12 [Myometrium-inner half] for cases with "superficial" myometrial invasion.

 2000
20000418 Measured Thickness/EOD-Extension--Melanoma: If the Clark's level is not provided, can it be estimated using the depth of invasion provided in the pathology report and associating that number with the Clark's levels identified in the SEER Summary Staging Guide?

For cases diagnosed 1998-2003:

No. Do not use the SEER Summary Stage Guide or any other guide to derive an estimated Clark's level from the thickness identified in the pathology report. The two measurements need to come directly from the pathology report. Each is coded separately in EOD. Thickness is collected in a separate field so we can capture the actual measurement stated in the pathology report. This has made it possible for us to group depth of invasion for analysis purposes in any manner we might wish. In addition, we can always collapse this information to the Summary Stage or TNM using the AJCC rules. AJCC rules use both depth of invasion and thickness in determining pathologic staging, and, if there is an inconsistency between them, the rules say code to the higher T classification, that is, the least favorable finding.

 2000