Home
| Report | Question ID | Question | Discussion | Answer | Year |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
20190027 | Extent of Disease 2018/Primary tumor/Neoadjuant treatment: If there is no clinical information available and all that is available is the post-neoadjuvant information, is it better to code EOD unknown (999) or use the post-neoadjuvant information to code EOD? See Discussion. |
The Extent of Disease (EOD) Manual states: Neoadjuvant (preoperative) therapy: If the patient receives neoadjuvant (preoperative) systemic therapy (chemotherapy, immunotherapy) or radiation therapy, code the clinical information if that is the farthest extension documented. If the post-neoadjuvant surgery shows more extensive disease, code the extension based on the post-neoadjuvant information. |
Code EOD Primary Tumor using the post neoadjuvant information for this case. Since the only information you have is the post neoadjuvant, code that. EOD combines clinical and pathological information. |
2019 |
|
|
20190009 | First Course Treatment/Surgery of Primary Site--Breast: How is "Goldilocks," also referred to as oncoplastic reconstruction, in the surgery section for breast cancer patients coded? |
Code Goldilocks mastectomy in Surgery of Primary Site. Breast surgery code 30 seems to be the best available choice for "Goldilocks" mastectomy. It is essentially a skin-sparing mastectomy with breast reconstruction. The choice between code 30 and codes in the 40-49 range depends on the extent of the breast removal. Review the operative report carefully and assign the code the best reflects the extent of the breast removal. |
2019 | |
|
|
20190089 | Solid Tumor Rules (2018)/Histology--Lung: Rule H3 of the Solid Tumor Rules was added to capture non-small cell carcinoma modified by ambiguous terminology when the physician confirms the ambiguous term as the histologic diagnosis, also included in Coding Histology instruction 3.B. If differentiation and features are not included in the histology term, does instruction 2 takes precedence? See Discussion. |
For example, pathologic diagnosis is non-small cell carcinoma with squamous features. The medical oncologist describes this as squamous cell carcinoma and begins treatment regimen. As I interpret the rules, we would use code 8046, non-small cell carcinoma, because of instruction 2 and the fact that features is not included in the list of ambiguous terminology. |
Code 8046 using Coding Instruction 2 that says to: Code the histology described as differentiation or features/features of ONLY when there is a specific ICD-O code for the "NOS with ____ features" or "NOS with ____ differentiation." Note: Do not code differentiation or features when there is no specific ICD-O code. In the example, no ambiguous terminology is used. If ambiguous terminology is used indicating a more specific term, you would code to the specific histology. |
2019 |
|
|
20190004 | Systemic/Surgery Sequence: Does the Systemic/Surgery Sequence field apply to only the first surgery performed (Date of First Surgical Procedure) or does it apply to the most definitive surgery (Date Most Definitive Surgery) as well? See Discussion. |
Example: Bladder primary with transurethral resection of the bladder tumor (TURBT) on 2/17/2017 (Date of First Surgical Proc) followed by a second TURBT on 3/24/2017 (Date Most Definitive Surgery) with mitomycin C instilled on the second, most definitive TURB procedure. There is an edit failure (IFX166) when Systemic/Surgery Sequence is coded 5 (intra-operative systemic) and Systemic Date does not match Date of First Surgical Procedure. How should we capture the intra-operative systemic treatment during the second, most definitive TURB? Is the correct Surgery/Systemic Sequence code 3 (systemic after surgery) for this case because (intra-operative) chemo was technically given after the first surgery? |
Assign code 3 to Systemic/Surgery Sequence and document the intraoperative treatment in the text field. Surgery is defined as a Surgical Procedure to the Primary Site (codes 10-90), Scope of RLN Surgery (codes 1-7), or Surgical Procedure of Other Site (codes 1-5) in the 2018 SEER Manual. In this case, the treatment was after the first surgical procedure. |
2019 |
|
|
20190019 | Solid Tumor Rules 2018/Histology--Brain and CNS: How is histology coded for a single meningioma tumor when the histology is a meningioma comprised of multiple specific subtypes/variants? See Discussion. |
Example: Patient has a left cerebral meningioma that is meningothelial meningioma (9531) and two right-sided cerebral meningiomas: one that is transitional meningioma (9537) and the other that is meningioma, transitional and angiomatous, WHO Grade I. If the histology for the mixed tumor is 9534 (angiomatous meningioma), then there are three primaries. If the histology is 9537 (transitional meningioma), then there are two primaries. Per Table 6, angiomatous meningioma is 9534/0 and transitional meningioma is 9537/0. There is no mixed histology coding rule, or mixed histology meningioma code. There is also no default rule that would instruct registrars to code the numerically higher ICD-O code or to default to a meningioma (NOS) histology code. |
Code the histology for the meningioma, transitional and angiomatous, WHO Grade I to Meningioma, NOS (9530/0). Since a mixed meningioma ICD-O code has not been proposed by WHO, we consulted with our expert neuropathologist. The other option is to follow back with the pathologist and code what they feel is the predominant type. A new histology rule for coding mixed meningiomas will be added in a future update of CNS rules. |
2019 |
|
|
20190106 | Tumor Size--Esophagus: Can information from the endoscopy procedure that implies a size of 3 cm for Tumor Size--Clinical be used for Esophagus? See Discussion. |
1-28-2018 CT Scan: 2.4 cm mass 2-15-2018 Endoscopy: Mass was present 22 to 25 cm. Biopsies were taken with cold forceps for histology; biopsy positive. |
For the case you describe, we would record the clinical tumor size stated on the CT report. The priority order for clinical tumor size is as follows. 1. Biopsy or operative (surgical exploration) report 2. Imaging 3. Physical exam We do not recommend coding tumor size based on an inferred tumor size from a description such as "Mass was present 22 to 25 cm." Look for an actual measurement of the mass, or a stated tumor size. Use text fields to record details. |
2019 |
|
|
20190052 | Solid Tumor Rules (2018)/Multiple Primaries--Head & Neck: How many primaries are accessioned when a patient is diagnosed with right nasal cavity (C300) invasive nonkeratinizing squamous cell carcinoma (8072/3) in 2015 treated with radiation and excision, followed by a 2019 right nasal cavity (C300) invasive squamous cell carcinoma (NOS, 8070/3)? See Discussion. |
Head and Neck Multiple Primary Rule M8 appears to be the first rule that applies to this case and instructs the user to abstract multiple primaries when separate/non-contiguous tumors are on different rows in the appropriate site table (Tables 1-9) in the Equivalent Terms and Definitions. Table 1 (tumors of the nasal cavity) shows Non-keratinizing squamous cell carcinoma and squamous cell carcinoma on different rows making the 2019 case a new primary. Is this correct? |
Abstract two primaries using Head and Neck Solid Tumor Rule M8 when separate/non-contiguous tumors are on different rows in the appropriate site table, in this case, Table 1 Nasal Cavity and Paranasal Sinuses. |
2019 |
|
|
20190062 | Solid Tumor Rules (2018)/Histology--Brain: How is histology coded for a left frontal lobe mass when the final diagnosis is malignant neuroglial tumor and the diagnosis comment describes multiple possible histologies? See Discussion. |
Left frontal mass biopsy diagnosis comment states: Given the synaptophysin and patchy CD34 staining of these cells, the possibility of ganglioglioma and pleomorphic xanthoastrocytoma is raised. Astroblastoma and ependymoma were considered given the perivascular pseudorosettes, however GFAP staining is quite limited against these tumors. Reticulin stain shows limited perivascular reticulin staining however. Nevertheless, the necrosis, mitotic activity and elevated mitotic activity would point to a malignant neoplasm. Given the neural and limited GFAP staining, a generic classification of neuroglial is provided. This is the only available information. Further clarification or discussion with the physician or pathologist is not possible. Therefore, is this diagnosis of neuroglial tumor equivalent to that described in SINQ 20091037? |
Code to 8000/3. Use text fields to record the details. The WHO Revised 4th Ed CNS Tumors includes a chapter for "Neuronal and mixed neuronal-glial tumors. This chapter lists 13 histologies in this category. Glioneuronal NOS is not listed. Do not assign 9505 because ambiguous terminology was used AND because of the numerous possible histologies discussed for this diagnosis. |
2019 |
|
|
20190006 | MP/H Rules/Multiple primaries--Breast: Please confirm Multiple Primaries/Histology Breast Rule M8 applies in this 2017 case. The surgical resection is >60 days past the biopsy date but is it possible treatment plans for breast could span >60 days and this is one primary? See Discussion. |
7/25/17 Part A: Left breast at 8:00, 5 CFN: Specimen type: Stereotactic biopsy. Tumor type: Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), cribriform type. Tumor size: The largest focus of DCIS measures 1 mm in greatest dimension as measured on the slide. Nuclear grade: 2 (Intermediate grade). Microcalcifications: Present. Other findings: Stromal fibrosis, microcalcification and fat necrosis. 11/1/17 A. Sentinel lymph node, left: One lymph node, negative for metastatic tumor on three levels of routine H\T\E and pan cytokeratin immunohistochemical stains. B. Left breast: Procedure: Total mastectomy with skin and nipple. Specimen Laterality: Left. Lymph Node Sampling: Yes, portion A. Specimen Integrity: Intact. Histologic Type: Extensive ductal carcinoma in situ and one focus of Invasive ductal carcinoma with mucinous features. Histologic Grade (Nottingham Histologic Score): Glandular Differentiation: Score 3 Nuclear Grade: Score 2. Mitotic Count: Score 1. Total Nottingham score 6 (grade 2, moderately differentiated). Tumor Size: 3.3 x 2 mm (0.33 x 0.2 cm) measured on slide (B3). Tumor Site: Lower inner quadrant of left breast. Tumor Focality: Unifocal. Ductal Carcinoma In Situ (DCIS): Present, cribriform, solid and micropapillary types with focal necrosis and calcifications. Size of DCIS: Number of blocks examined: Thirty (30). Number of blocks with DCIS: Thirteen (13). Lobular Carcinoma In Situ (LCIS): Not identified, Lymphovascular Invasion: Present. Perineural Invasion: Not identified. Other Findings: Changes consistent with previous biopsy site. Cysts, foci of atypical ductal hyperplasia, focal ductal hyperplasia, adenosis, stromal fibrosis and microcalcifications. Skin (epidermis): Uninvolved. Nipple: Uninvolved. Margins: 1 mm from DCIS to the closest deep margin (slide B12). At least 10 mm (1 cm) from invasive carcinoma to deep margin. Estrogen receptor (ER, clone 1D5) by immunohistochemistry performed on this material: Positive (invasive and in situ carcinoma), high intensity, in greater than 95% of carcinoma cells. Progesterone receptor (PR, clone 16) by immunohistochemistry performed on this material: Positive (invasive and in situ carcinoma), moderate intensity in about 80% of the carcinoma cells. Her 2 by FISH performed on this material: Pending, an addendum to follow. Pathologic staging: pT1aN0(sn)MX (AJCC 7th edition). Dictated by: (Pathologist), MD Intradepartmental review. |
Abstract a single breast primary. Apply MP/H Rule M3 as this is a single tumor identified in the biopsy at 8 o'clock and at the same location in the mastectomy specimen. Code the behavior as invasive according to rule H9. The first course of therapy ends when the documented treatment plan is completed, no matter how long, unless there is progression, recurrence, or treatment failure. |
2019 |
|
|
20190037 | Solid Tumor Rules/Multiple Primaries--Breast: How many primaries should be abstracted for simultaneously diagnosed non-contiguous invasive duct carcinoma and mucinous carcinoma? Does rule M12 apply since the two histologies are on different rows of Table 3 of the Breast Solid Tumor Rules? See Discussion. |
Core biopsy of left breast at 2:00: Invasive ductal carcinoma, Nottingham score 6/9. Core biopsy of left breast at 4:00: Invasive mucinous carcinoma (variant of ductal carcinoma), Nottingham score 5/9. Post neo-adjuvant mastectomy: Main (largest tumor): Invasive ductal carcinoma, upper outer quadrant grade 2. Secondary tumor: mucinous carcinoma, grade 1 at 4:00. |
Abstract multiple primaries when separate, non-contiguous tumors are on different rows in Table 3 of the Breast Solid Tumor Rules. Use Rule M14 as each row in the table reflects a distinctly different histology, in this case, invasive ductal carcinoma (8500) and mucinous carcinoma (8480). |
2019 |
An official website of the United States government
