[Jim Hofferkamp]

There was a problem with the tables used by these 2 edits, C637 and C638 not accounted for in table used by
Tag #N2824, _SYS Schema ID, Primary Site, Histology, Behavior (NAACCR), C637-C639 not accounted for in table used by #N5015, RX Summ–Surg Prim Site, Schema ID, Primary Site (COC). The 2 tables have been corrected in v21.

[Jim Hofferkamp]

Louis,
are you using v18D?

[Jim Hofferkamp]

Hi Helen,
This is a known edit issue. We changed the logic so it doesn’t check scope of regional ln surgery against treatment status.

I recommend coding it correctly and saving it as incomplete until you get the updated metafile. The new metafile should be released in a couple of weeks, but it may be a couple of months before the updated metafile makes it to your facility!

[Jim Hofferkamp]

Hi Aimee,
We are aware of this situation, but have not yet come up with a solution. AJCC has confirmed that they do not want us to change the edit to allow an in situ stage to be assigned if the behavior is /3.

The solid tumor WG has confirmed that at this time this histology should be coded with a /3. It may change in the future, but for now we should code these cases as /3.

Seems like we are stuck.

[Jim Hofferkamp]

Michael,
I think the edit that is giving you a problem is RX Summ–Treatm Stat, Treatment (COC) N1601.

Is this a pre-2018 case?

If yes, could you tell me what is in phase 1 rad tx volume? What about Rad Regional RX modality?

If this is a 2018 case, could you tell me what is in Phase 1 Rad Primary Treatment Volume?

Below is the edit description for when treatment status is 0.
___

2. If RX Summ–Treatment Status = 0 (no treatment) or 2 (active surveillance), then the
treatment fields must all indicate “no treatment”.
Treatment is considered “not given” if all of the following conditions are true:
RX Summ–Surg Prim Site = 00, 98
RX Summ–Surg Oth Reg/Dis = 0
RX Summ–BRM = 00, 80-88
RX Summ–Chemo = 00, 80-88
RX Summ–Hormone = 00, 80-88
RX Summ–Transplnt/Endocr = 00, 80-88
RX Summ–Other = 0, 7-8
if diagnosis date < 2018 and Phase I Radiation Primary Treatment Volume is blank, Rad--Regional RX Modality = 00 if diagnosis date 2018+, Phase I Radiation Primary Treatment Volume = 00

[Jim Hofferkamp]

I’m sorry to hear that! I took a look at the edit detail report and you are correct. We will get it updated.

I’ll see if can’t update the error message as well. The one you got wasn’t very helpful.

[Jim Hofferkamp]

Hi Christy,
This is a known issue and will be corrected in the next update (v18C). I’m hoping that will be out in the next couple of weeks.

[Jim Hofferkamp]

The edits noted have been updated to include a skip for diagnosis date > 2017. skip also added for
CS Itmes – NPCR Required – SSF 11 (CS) 2015 for diagnosis date > 2015.

Thank you for letting us know!

[Jim Hofferkamp]

There was an extra space next to the c, p, and yp values for t1b. This has been corrected in the edit logic for v18c. I’m hoping the metafile will be posted in early March. Until then you should hold the case.

Thank for letting me know!

[Jim Hofferkamp]

I received the same error.

Looks like we are going to have to correct the edit. I suggest saving the case as incomplete until we post the next edit update. That will probably be some time in March.

[Jim Hofferkamp]

Hi Loretta
We are working on edits to help enforce reporting radiation for pre-2018 cases. I hope to have them in the next edits release.

[Jim Hofferkamp]

Great suggestion!
I will take your suggestion to the NAACCR edits WG.

[Jim Hofferkamp]

nancy,
I’ll forward your question the Edits WG and to NPCR for a response.

[Jim Hofferkamp]

Hi Loretta,
You are correct, this edit only checks stage group if the T, N, and M values are valid for that particular site/histology. If T4 is not a valid value, then the edit would pass. The purpose of the edit is to check valid T, N, M combinations against the assigned stage group.

The edit referred to above is a CoC edit and is included in the Hosp edit set. I believe the case you described could be a Stage IIA or IIB based on the subcategory of the T2. Per AJCC, this case should have a stage group of 99 since the missing subcategory could change the stage group. NPCR, SEER, and CoC are aware of how this edit works and the scenario above has been discussed (ad nauseam) during edits WG calls will all of the standard setters present.

Standard setters may use the directly assigned T, N, and M to calculate a stage group and may choose to “downstage” to a IIA. This edit would not be run against calculated or derived stage groups.

Does that help?

[Jim Hofferkamp]

In our last update from CoC they indicated they would like to have the STORE manual posted before March 1. Have you seen the Timeline posted to the implementation page? It was late updated on 2/13/18.
https://staging.naaccr.org/2018-implementation/#Timeline

[Author]

Posts