Question: 20180056

Status


Final

Category


#1:   Primary site
#2:   Ovary
#3:  


References


Source 1:   2018 SEER Manual
pgs:  
Notes:   Changing Information on the Abstract
Source 2:  
pgs:  
Notes:  


Question


Primary Site--Ovary:  How should primary site be coded for a previously diagnosed ovarian cancer which is now being reclassified as fallopian tube?  See Discussion.



Discussion


There is a group of patients diagnosed within the past few years with ovarian cancers who are now enrolled in a clinical trial and are being screened as potential patients for a particular protocol. The screening for these particular cases is being done by a pathologist who has a particular interest in GYN pathology. As the pathologist is screening the cases, there are some which the pathologist is reclassifying as being fallopian tube primaries rather than ovarian primaries. This is apparently due to newly emerging findings and literature. The problem for me is that these cases have been entered into the registry as ovarian primaries, which was correct as of the time of the initial diagnosis. Should the abstracts remain as they were initially coded, since the diagnosis was ovarian cancer at the time they were diagnosed, or should these cases be updated to reflect the current pathologist's interpretation that these are fallopian tube primaries?



Answer


Do not change the primary site in this situation. Since the review was done for a clinical trial and the change was not officially made in the patient's medical record, the primary site remains ovary for the cancer registry. Add an explanatory note in a text field for future reference.



History




Last Updated


08/01/2018

Date Finalized


11/13/2018