Back to Search Results

Report Produced: 03/24/2023 22:43 PM

Report Question ID (Descending) Question Discussion Answer

Solid Tumor Rules/Multiple Primaries:  Should two 2021 diagnoses be abstracted as two primaries? The patient has a history of thyroid cancer in 2008 with no evidence of recurrence/progression.  In 2021, two abstracts were submitted with a diagnosis of C809, poorly differentiated malignant neoplasm and a C421, myeloproliferative disorder.  See Discussion.

2021-Right pleural fluid:  Negative for carcinoma.

5/18/2021: Right iliac crest bone marrow core biopsy, aspirate smear, clot section and peripheral blood smear:  Hypercellular bone marrow, morphological findings are suspicious for a myeloproliferative neoplasm. Flow Cytometry: Slight immunophenotypic abnormalities of the myeloid cells. No abnormal B cell, T cell, or NK cell populations identified. Normal female karyotype. KARYOTYPE: 46,XX[20]. Negative for deletion of 13q14.3 (D13S319) by FISH. Negative for deletion of 13q34 (LAMP1) by FISH. Negative for hyperdiploidy involving chromosome 9 by FISH. Negative for t(9;22)(q34;q11.2) by FISH. Negative for deletion of the EGR1 gene on 5q31 by FISH. Negative for monosomy 5 by FISH. Negative for deletion of 7q31 by FISH. Negative for monosomy 7 by FISH. Negative for deletion of 20q12 by FISH. Negative for trisomy of chromosome 8 by FISH.

6/4/21-Left adrenal; biopsy: poorly-differentiated malignant neoplasm with extensive necrosis. Immunohistochemical stains show the neoplastic cells to be negative for CK7, TTF-1 and p63. Negative CK7 and TTF-1 would argue against a lung primary. Correlation with clinical and radiological findings is advised.

We are unable to contact the provider.

Based on the diagnosis date for the unknown primary, use the 2007 MPH Other sites rules. Since the site codes differ for each primary, rule M11 applies, abstract two primaries.


Reportability--Thyroid:  Is a case with thyroid fine needle aspirate (FNA) cytology with nodule 1 Bethesda category 5 and nodule 2 Bethesda 6, reportable in 2021? Does the Bethesda category 5 or 6 have any bearing on reportability?

In the absence of information to the contrary, thyroid FNAs designated as Bethesda classification category VI are reportable. Thyroid FNAs designated as Bethesda classification category V are not reportable unless there is additional information confirming a reportable diagnosis. For both Bethesda V and VI, NCCN Guidelines recommend total thyroidectomy or lobectomy (depending on tumor size and nodal involvement) for the purposes of definitive diagnosis/treatment, so additional information should be available.

We will add this to the next version of the SEER manual.

In your example, nodule 1 Bethesda V is not reportable. Nodule 2 Bethesda VI is reportable.


Reportability/Histology--Skin:  Is dermatofibrosarcoma protuberans (DFSP) with fibrosarcomatous overgrowth, DFSP with fibrosarcomatous component Grade 2, or DFSP with focal myxoid features (2022) reportable for 2021-2022 diagnoses?

Yes. DFSP with fibrosarcomatous overgrowth and DFSP with fibrosarcomatous component Grade 2 are synonymous with fibrosarcomatous DFSP (8832/3).  Our expert pathologist also advises that DFSP with focal myxoid features is the same as DFSP, myxoid (8832/3).


Solid Tumor Rules/Multiple Primaries--Prostate:  How many primaries are accessioned when a 06/2022 diagnosis of prostate adenocarcinoma is followed less than one year later by a 01/2023 diagnosis of small cell carcinoma (SmCC)?  See Discussion.

Rule M4 was added to the Other Sites M Rules to address diagnoses of small cell carcinoma following prostate adenocarcinoma, but Rule M4 states the diagnoses must be greater than one year apart.

In this situation, the diagnoses were less than one year apart and one must continue through the M Rules. The next M Rule that applies Rule M18: “Abstract multiple primaries when separate/non-contiguous tumors are on multiple rows in Table 2-21 in the Equivalent Terms and Definitions. Timing is irrelevant.” If one were to STOP at the first rule that applies, one would stop at Rule M18 which confirms the prostatic adenocarcinoma and small cell carcinoma are separate primaries, regardless of timing. If these are not to be accessioned as multiple primaries, does an Exception need to be added to M18?

Assuming the smal cell is a seperate tumor, accession two primaries, adenocarcinoma (8140/3) of the prostate and SmCC (8041/3) of the prostate using Rule M18 of the current Other Sites Solid Tumor Rules.  As these two tumors are less than a year apart, Rule M4 does not apply; however, Rule 18 does apply as these are two distinct histology types. It takes time for an acinar tumor to transform into the small cell and it is usually triggered by hormone and/or radiaiton treatment. 


Solid Tumor Rules/Multiple Primaries--Prostate: How many primaries are accessioned when a 2023 liver biopsy diagnosed metastatic small cell carcinoma (SmCC) of the prostate following a 2018 radical prostatectomy treated diagnosis of prostatic adenocarcinoma?  See Discussion.

SINQs 20190083, 20180088, and 20130221 all indicate diagnoses of prostate adenocarcinoma, followed by a diagnosis of metastatic small cell carcinoma of the prostate are separate primaries because these are distinctly different histologies. Does this logic still apply for 2023 and later since Rule M4 was added to the Other Sites M Rules? Rule M4 states, “Abstract multiple primaries when the patient has a subsequent small cell carcinoma of the prostate more than 1 year following a diagnosis of acinar adenocarcinoma and/or subtype/variant of acinar adenocarcinoma of prostate.”

This patient has a 2018 diagnosis of prostate adenocarcinoma treated with radical prostatectomy, followed by a 2023 diagnosis of metastatic small cell carcinoma of the prostate diagnosed on a liver metastasis core biopsy. Rule M4 does not indicate whether it applies to subsequent biopsy confirmed metastatic tumor only. When a diagnosis of small cell carcinoma follows a diagnosis of prostatic adenocarcinoma, it is almost always confirmed in metastatic sites rather than in the primary site. Does the logic in the referenced SINQs above still apply for Rule M4?

Accession two primaries, adenocarcinoma (8140/3) of the prostate and SmCC (8041/3) of the prostate using Rule M4 of the current Other Sites Solid Tumor Rules.  The guidance in the aforementioned SINQ entries still applies with the additional criteria of being diagnosed more than one year following the diagnosis of acinar adenocarcinoma, or subtype, of the prostate as stated in Rule M4 of the updated 2023 rules. Small cell carcinomas of the prostate are often diagnosed on follow-up TURP/biopsies; however, if a patient had a previous radical prostatectomy, the small cell carcinoma would be identified in a metstatic site and would still be a new prostate primary. This includes biopsy confirmed metastatic tumors only. It remains important to capture the two distinct histology types.


Solid Tumor Rules/Multiple Primaries--Breast:  How many primaries are accessioned when a 2020 diagnosis of invasive ductal carcinoma treated by lumpectomy is followed by a 2023 diagnosis of invasive lobular carcinoma treated by mastectomy?  See Discussion.

Historically, multiple invasive ductal and lobular carcinomas diagnosed within 5 years were abstracted as a single primary. However, it is not clear if Rule M10 or M14 applies to this situation per the 2023 Solid Tumor Rules updates.

Rule M10 addresses multiple tumors of carcinoma of no special type (NST)/duct and lobular, but there is no timing criteria mentioned. Does M10 apply to cases diagnosed synchronously, or metachronously, or at least within 5 years? Should Rule M10 include a Note instructing registrars to accession a single primary for the scenario in question?

If timing matters for Rule M10, then the next rule that applies is M14. Rule M14 instructs one to abstract multiple primaries when separate/non-contiguous tumors are on different rows in Table 3, and carcinoma NST/duct and lobular carcinoma are on separate rows in Table 3.

Abstract a single primary using the Breast Solid Tumor Rules, Rule M10, assuming the tumors are in the same breast.  This rule is specific to multiple tumors of carcinoma NST/duct and lobular.  Timing is not a factor in this rule.  As stated in ‘New for 2023,’  the rules for determining single versus multiple primaries in tumors with carcinoma NST/duct and lobular carcinoma have been revised and now align with ICD-O-3.2.

Tumors occurring more than five years apart are multiple primaries and would have been caught at Rule M5. Thus, rule M10 pertains to tumors occuring less than five years apart.


Solid Tumor Rules/Multiple Primaries--Vulva: How many primaries are accessioned when a 2023 diagnosis of keratinizing squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) (8071/3) of the vulva follows a previous diagnosis of nonkeratinizing SCC (8072/3) of the vulva and the timing rule (M12) does not apply?  See Discussion.

Table 19: Vulva Histologies of the Other Sites Solid Tumor Rules does not include entries for either keratinizing or nonkeratinizing squamous cell carcinoma in the “Squamous cell carcinoma, NOS” row. However, these are two distinctly different histologies per the ICD-O-3.2.

All other Solid Tumor Rules schemas include an M Rule instructing one to abstract multiple primaries when separate/non-contiguous tumors are two or more different subtypes/variants in Column 3 of the Specific Histologies, NOS, and Subtype/Variants Table for the schema (e.g., Rule M6 for Lung). The timing of these tumors is stated to be irrelevant. The Notes confirm the tumors may be subtypes/variants of the same or different NOS histologies and tumors in column 3 are all distinctly different histologies (even if they are in the same row). However, the 2023 Other Sites schema appears to be missing this rule.

Should these distinctly different histologies be accessioned as separate primaries? Is an M Rule missing from the Other Sites schema to address distinctly different histologies?

Table 19 is based on WHO 5th Ed Tumors of vulva and squamous cell variants, keratinizing and non-keratinizing, are no longer recommended and are excluded from the 5th Ed. HPV related terminology is now preferred for these neoplasms.

Per consultation with our GYN expert pathologist, based on the information provided, this is likely a single tumor that was not completely excised in the original biopsy. A new tumor in the same site would not appear within 8 months. If you cannot confirm two separate/non-contiguous tumors were present, abstract a single primary per M1. As for histology, the tumor showed both keratinizing and non-keratinizing features and HPV status is unclear. Per our expert, code to SCC 8070/3—keratinization or lack of does not change treatment or prognosis.

Even If there is proof of separate/non-contiguous tumors, our expert still feels this is a single primary coded to SCC 8070/3. Treatment does not differ by keratinization or HPV status. Coding two primaries would be incorrect and inflate incidence rates.

Per our expert, this is an unusual occurrence. The rules cover 85% of cases but there will always be situations that do not fit a rule. This case is an example of that.  A new GYN specific Solid Tumor Rules module is under development and a rule to address this situation could be included.


SEER Manual/Surgery of Primary Site 2023--Breast:  What instructions should be followed when the 2023 SEER Manual Appendix C 2023 Breast Surgery Codes advise to code 1 in Surgical Procedure of Other Site for a simple bilateral mastectomy but the 2023 STORE Manual does not.  See Discussion.

The 2023 SEER Manual, Appendix C 2023 Breast Surgery Codes, note reads: 

SEER Note: Assign code A760 for a more extensive bilateral mastectomy. Assign code 0 in Surgical Procedure of Other Site (NAACCR #1294). For a simple bilateral mastectomy, assign code A410 with code 1 in Surgical Procedure of Other Site (NAACCR #1294).

In the 2023 STORE Manual, these notes are not mentioned and we are instructed not to code surgery to other site. Other education related to 2023 breast coding provided by NAACCR states to not code surgery to other site. 

Assign code 1 in Surgical Procedure of Other Site (NAACCR #1294) when a simple bilateral mastectomy is performed for a single tumor involving both breasts. This statement was inadvertently omitted from the STORE manual and will be added back in: For single primaries only, code removal of contralateral breast under the data item Surgical Procedure/Other Site (NAACCR Item #1294) or Surgical Procedure/Other Site at This Facility (NAACCR Item #674).

The information presented by NAACCR was intended to be consistent with what is in the SEER manual. It may have been misuderstood.


SEER Manual/Reportability--Appendix:  Is low-grade appendiceal mucinous neoplasm (LAMN) with peritoneal spread followed by evidence of extraperitoneal metastatic disease reportable prior to 2022?  See Discussion.

In 2021, the patient was diagnosed with a non-reportable appendiceal LAMN.  Resection showed a tumor diffusely involving the appendix and perforating the visceral peritoneum, as well as extensive intraperitoneal metastasis.  In 2023, a lung wedge resection revealed metastatic mucinous neoplasm involving lung parenchyma and pleura, consistent with metastasis of the known appendiceal primary.  It is understood that intraperitoneal spread of an appendiceal LAMN does not make it reportable because the peritoneal disease is also non-invasive.  Does extraperitoneal metastasis of an appendiceal LAMN diagnosed prior to 2022 make it invasive disease and therefore reportable? 

LAMN diagnosed prior to 1/1/2022 is not reportable even when it spreads or metastasizes according to our expert pathologist consultant.  Spread of this neoplasm does not indicate malignancy.  For this case to be reportable, the diagnosis must indicate “carcinoma or “adenocarcinoma.”  Pre-2022, LAMN is not reportable even when treated with surgery and chemotherapy.  LAMN is reportable starting with cases diagnosed in 2022.


SEER Manual/First Course Treatment--Hematologic Transplant And Endocrine Procedures:  How are Surgery of Primary Site and the Hematologic Transplant And Endocrine Procedures data items coded when patient has total abdominal hysterectomy and bilateral oophorectomy for an endometrial primary during the same procedure? Also, how would these data items be coded for a vaginal primary in a surgical scenario?  See Discussion.

The 2023 SEER Manual instructions contain a new note in Hematologic Transplant And Endocrine Procedure, Coding Instruction 6, regarding bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy (BSO) when performed for hormonal effect for breast, endometrial, vaginal, and other primary cancers. While we have observed BSO being performed for breast primaries, we do not recall ever seeing a statement for endometrial or vaginal primaries regarding a “BSO being done as hormonal manipulation” when scheduled either with or without a hysterectomy being performed simultaneously. As a result, we are not clear exactly when a BSO would be captured in the Hematologic Transplant And Endocrine Procedure field for these gynecologic primary sites.

Also, if these types of procedures are Hematologic Transplant And Endocrine Procedures, are they also captured and coded in the Surgery of Primary Site codes that directly relate to those same organs? Does timing have any effect on the coding of either field?

For a primary endometrial or ovarian cancer, record the oophorectomy/BSO procedure using the appropriate Surgery of Primary Site code that includes oophorectomy/BSO when done as part of first course of treatment (surgical resection). If performed for hormone effect, also record in the Hematologic Transplant and Endocrine Procedures data item.  For other primary sites whose Surgery of Primary Site codes do not include oophorectomy/BSO, record it in the Hematologic Transplant and Endocrine Procedures data item when performed for hormone effect.  Document information in the appropriate text fields.

Candidates for risk-reducing BSO may include those with hereditary syndromes (such as BRCA mutations) or genes that carry a substantially increased lifetime risk of ovarian malignancy or hormone-sensitive cancers including estrogen-dependent cancers, like breast cancer, ovarian cancer and endometrial (uterine) cancer that rely on estrogen to develop and grow.