Home
| Report | Question ID | Question | Discussion | Answer | Year |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
20130033 | Histology--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: How is the histology coded for a low grade B-cell lymphoma with plasmacytic differentiation? |
This answer has been corrected. Previous answer is shown below under "History." Assign 9591/3 for this case. See also SINQ 20190070. |
2013 | |
|
|
20130032 | Primary site--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: How is the primary site coded for plasma cell myeloma with radiologic evidence of multiple lytic lesions? See Discussion. | Patient complained of pain in the right side and back right upper flank area. CT shows an anterior mediastinal mass and abnormal appearance of skeleton. CXR: Age indeterminate T8 compression fracture. CT chest: abnormal appearance of skeleton. Correlate clinically for myeloma or mets. Acute T5 or T8 compression fractures. Anterior mediastinal mass which may represent thymoma, lymph nodes or metastases. 03/22/12 Metastatic Series: Nonspecific hypodensities in pelvis, left hip and right acromion. Possibility of myeloma can't be totally excluded. Bone marrow right post iliac crest core biopsy, clot section and aspirate: plasma cell myeloma.
Should the primary site be coded to the bone marrow because the diagnosis of plasma cell myeloma was supported by radiologic evidence of multiple lytic lesions? The bone marrow biopsy confirmed the radiology reports. |
For cases diagnosed 2010 and forward, access the Hematopoietic Database at http://seer.cancer.gov/seertools/hemelymph.
Code the primary site to C421 [bone marrow] per the Heme DB and Rule PH30. The Primary Site(s) section in the Heme DB indicates the primary site for plasma cell myeloma is C421 [bone marrow].
The Primary Site Coding Instructions in the Heme Manual (Rule 1) states that when a specific code is listed under the Primary Site(s) section of the Heme DB it is the only primary site code that can be assigned for that leukemia, myelodysplastic syndrome or myeloproliferative syndrome. Applying the PH Rules will result in the same answer for primary site, bone marrow [C421].
SEER*Educate provides training on how to use the Heme Manual and DB. If you are unsure how to arrive at the answer in this SINQ question, refer to SEER*Educate to practice coding hematopoietic and lymphoid neoplasms. Review the step-by-step instructions provided for each case scenario to learn how to use the application and manual to arrive at the answer provided. https://educate.fhcrc.org/LandingPage.aspx. |
2013 |
|
|
20130031 | Multiple primaries--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: How many primaries are accessioned when a plasmacytoma of the intervertebral disc is diagnosed in 2010 followed by a diagnosis of immature plasma cell myeloma by a right hip biopsy in 2011? See Discussion. |
The patient was diagnosed with intervertebral disc plasmacytoma and had radiation therapy to the pelvic bones in 2010. In 2011 (more than 21 days later) a right hip biopsy revealed immature plasma cell myeloma. There is clinical documentation that this is progression into myeloma. Per the Heme DB (Primary Site(s) and Definition sections) and Rule PH30, in the Heme Manual, the primary site is coded to C421 [bone marrow] and the histology is coded 9732/3 [plasma cell myeloma] when there is a clinical diagnosis of multiple myeloma and/or there is no documentation of a bone marrow biopsy or the results are unknown. This patient did have a bone marrow biopsy that indicates there are an increased plasma cells present; plasma cells represent less than 10%. The skeletal survey and bone scan did not reveal any further lesions. Is this progression of disease because there is only one lesion in the right hip 8 months after the diagnosis of plasmacytoma? Or is this a second primary based on the right hip biopsy that showed plasma cell myeloma and the physician's documentation of disease progression? Plasmacytomas are usually single lesions. Would this disease process have multiple lesions if they are diagnosed at different times? |
For cases diagnosed 2010 and forward, access the Hematopoietic Database at http://seer.cancer.gov/seertools/hemelymph. This case is accessioned as two primaries: Plasmacytoma diagnosed in 2010 and plasma cell myeloma diagnosed in 2011 per Rule M10. The patient has a diagnosis of a solitary plasmacytoma (chronic neoplasm) followed by a diagnosis of plasma cell myeloma (acute neoplasm) diagnosed greater than 21 days later. The physician is calling this a progression to plasma cell myeloma even though the bone marrow has less than 10% plasma cells, take this statement as progression or a clinical diagnosis of plasma cell myeloma. SEER*Educate provides training on how to use the Heme Manual and DB. If you are unsure how to arrive at the answer in this SINQ question, refer to SEER*Educate to practice coding hematopoietic and lymphoid neoplasms. Review the step-by-step instructions provided for each case scenario to learn how to use the application and manual to arrive at the answer provided. https://educate.fhcrc.org/LandingPage.aspx. |
2013 |
|
|
20130030 | Histology--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: How is histology coded for a patient diagnosed with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, immunoblastic [9684/3] in 2009 and a recurrence in 2010 at another facility was referred to as plasmablastic lymphoma [9735/3]? See Discussion. |
Which code is correct for the merged record? Is code 9735/3 [plasmablastic lymphoma] correct because code 9684/3 [DLBCL, immunoblastic] is now obsolete? |
For cases diagnosed 2010 and forward, access the Hematopoietic Database at http://seer.cancer.gov/seertools/hemelymph. This case was originally diagnosed in 2009, prior to the development of Hematopoietic Database. Therefore it is necessary to use the ICD-O-3 to code histology to 9684/3 [diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, immunoblastic]. Use the original histology diagnosed for the merged record because DLBCL, immunoblastic, and plasmablastic lymphoma are the same primary. Do not change the histology to code 9735/3 [plasmablastic lymphoma]. SEER*Educate provides training on how to use the Heme Manual and DB. If you are unsure how to arrive at the answer in this SINQ question, refer to SEER*Educate to practice coding hematopoietic and lymphoid neoplasms. Review the step-by-step instructions provided for each case scenario to learn how to use the application and manual to arrive at the answer provided. https://educate.fhcrc.org/LandingPage.aspx. |
2013 |
|
|
20130029 | Reportability--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: Is "post polycythemic myelofibrosis" reportable? See Discussion. | The bone marrow biopsy showed post polycythemic myelofibrosis. JAK2 mutations were present confirming the diagnosis of post polycythemic myelofibrosis. The patient does have a history of polycythemia vera (PV). | For cases diagnosed 2010 and forward, access the Hematopoietic Database at http://seer.cancer.gov/seertools/hemelymph.
Polycythemia Vera (PV) [9950/3] is reportable. The Abstractor Notes section in the Hematopoietic Database for PV indicates there are three phases of PV. The third phase is referred to as the "spent" or "post-polycythemic myelofibrosis phase". This patient appears to be in the third phase of PV. This would not be reported as a new primary if PV has already been reported.
SEER*Educate provides training on how to use the Heme Manual and DB. If you are unsure how to arrive at the answer in this SINQ question, refer to SEER*Educate to practice coding hematopoietic and lymphoid neoplasms. Review the step-by-step instructions provided for each case scenario to learn how to use the application and manual to arrive at the answer provided. https://educate.fhcrc.org/LandingPage.aspx. |
2013 |
|
|
20130028 | Primary site--CLL/SLL: How is the primary site coded and what rule applies when no bone marrow biopsy is performed on a patient diagnosed with chronic lymphocytic leukemia/small lymphocytic lymphoma (CLL/SLL) which was based on the results of an axillary biopsy, positive peripheral blood and a CT scan showing multiple lymph nodes involved above and below the diaphragm? See Discussion | The physician staged this as Stage 0 CLL/SLL. Should the primary site be coded to lymph nodes if the MD stated this was leukemia? | For cases diagnosed 2010 and forward, access the Hematopoietic Database at http://seer.cancer.gov/seertools/hemelymph.
Code the primary site to C421 [bone marrow] per Rule PH5. Code the primary site to the bone marrow when the peripheral blood is involved, even if no bone marrow biopsy is performed.
According to the notes for Rule PH5, CLL always has peripheral blood involvement (PH5 Note 1). CLL/SLL may also have involvement of lymph node regions in later stages (PH5, Note 2). For this patient a bone marrow biopsy was not performed but he had extensive lymph node and peripheral blood involvement. Therefore, the primary site is coded to C421. In addition, the physician's documentation specifies this patient has Stage 0 disease which indicates this disease process is being classified as leukemia (CLL).
SEER*Educate provides training on how to use the Heme Manual and DB. If you are unsure how to arrive at the answer in this SINQ question, refer to SEER*Educate to practice coding hematopoietic and lymphoid neoplasms. Review the step-by-step instructions provided for each case scenario to learn how to use the application and manual to arrive at the answer provided. https://educate.fhcrc.org/LandingPage.aspx. |
2013 |
|
|
20130027 | Reportability--Are well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumors and grade 1 neuroendocrine tumors of the appendix now reportable? See Discussion. |
The terminology for carcinoid tumors has changed. The current terminology used is "neuroendocrine tumor." Are well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumors of the appendix non-reportable because carcinoid, NOS of the appendix has a borderline behavior code [8240/1]? When the histology/behavior codes for the term "well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumor" became 8240/3, did SEER intend this change to also apply to appendix primaries? If so, for which diagnosis year did this change go into effect? |
Well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumors and grade 1 neuroendocrine tumors of the appendix are reportable because these tumors have a morphology code 8240/3 per the WHO Classification of Tumors of the Digestive System. However, per the ICD-O-3, carcinoid tumors of the appendix have a behavior code of /1 [borderline]. The terminology of neuroendocrine tumors is evolving and current thinking at the international level is that carcinoid/WD NET of appendix is reportable. However, reportability in the United States is based on ICD-O-3. The histology code for "Carcinoid of appendix" is 8240/1; the histology code for a carcinoids of all other primary sites is 8240/3. Until the United States adopts the proposed changes for ICD-O-3, reportability of appendix cases is as follows:
|
2013 |
|
|
20130024 | MP/H Rules/Histology--Bladder: How many primaries are accessioned and what rule applies when the patient has a mixed tumor with a urothelial carcinoma, NOS and a more specific histologic type followed by a diagnosis of urothelial carcinoma? See Discussion. |
The MP/H Rules do not specifically cover how to process urothelial carcinomas with a more specific type of carcinoma. Patient 1: Diagnosed in April 2010 with invasive urothelial carcinoma with signet ring features of the bladder. Site and histology are coded as C679 [bladder] and 8490/3 [signet ring cell carcinoma]. In January 2012 a subsequent diagnosis of invasive urothelial carcinoma of the bladder is made [C679, 8120/3]. Patient 2: Diagnosed in November 2009 with invasive papillary urothelial carcinoma with micropapillary and mucinous features of the bladder. Site and histology are coded C679 [bladder] and 8480/3 [mucinous carcinoma]. In April 2012 a subsequent diagnosis of high grade papillary and flat urothelial carcinoma without evidence of invasion is made [C679, 8130/2]. Does rule M9 apply and these are new primaries? |
For cases diagnosed 2007 and later, accession two primaries for each patient, signet ring cell carcinoma of the bladder and invasive urothelial carcinoma of the bladder for patient 1 and mucinous carcinoma of the bladder and non-invasive papillary urothelial carcinoma of the bladder for patient 2. The steps used to arrive at this decision are: Open the Multiple Primary and Histology Coding Rules Manual. Choose one of the three formats (i.e., flowchart, matrix or text). Go to the Urinary MP rules because site specific rules exist for this primary. Start at the MULTIPLE TUMORS module, rule M3. The rules are intended to be reviewed in consecutive order within a module. For both patients, rule M9 applies because the tumors have histology codes that are different at the second (xxx) number. This guideline will be reviewed for the next version of the MP/H Rules. |
2013 |
|
|
20130023 | Reportability--Brain and CNS: Why has reportability changed for "intradural extramedullary schwannomas"? Are all "spinal" schwannomas reportable or only those stated to be "intradural"? See Discussion. |
If intradural schwannomas are to be collected for cases diagnosed 2011 and later, why were they not included in the 2012 SEER Manual? Should collection of spinal schwannomas be postponed until the next revision of the MP/H Rules? |
The reportability of schwannomas was not initially agreed upon by the standard setters. After the issue was discussed by the CoC, NPCR and SEER Technical Workgroup and an agreement was reached. See #2 under Reportability in the Data Collection Answers from the CoC, NPCR, SEER Technical Workgroup http://www.seer.cancer.gov/registrars/data-collection.html#reportability.
The most accurate and most current instruction is to report these spinal tumors when they arise within the spinal dura or spinal nerve roots, or when they are stated to be "intradural" or "of the nerve root." Do not report these tumors when they arise in the peripheral nerves. The peripheral nerves are the portion of nerve extending beyond the spinal dura.
Spinal cord intradural schwannomas originate in spinal nerve roots. Spinal nerve root is best classified as spinal cord, C720. |
2013 |
|
|
20130022 | Reportability--Melanoma: Is "early" melanoma reportable? See Discussion. |
Because "evolving" melanoma was never reportable, this issue only relates to "early" melanoma. |
For cases diagnosed 2018 to 2020, early or evolving melanoma is not reportable. Evolving melanoma (borderline evolving melanoma): Evolving melanoma are tumors of uncertain biologic behavior. Histological changes of borderline evolving melanoma are too subtle for a definitive diagnosis of melanoma in situ. The tumors may be described as "proliferation of atypical melanocytes confined to epidermal and adnexal epithelium," "atypical intraepidermal melanocytic proliferation, "atypical intraepidermal melanocytic hyperplasia"; or "severe melanocytic dysplasia." Not reportable. Melanoma Solid Tumor Rules, 2018, page 3, https://seer.cancer.gov/tools/solidtumor/Melanoma_STM.pdf |
2013 |
An official website of the United States government
