Which MP/H rule applies to determining "recurrent" tumors?

The determination of whether a tumor is classified as a recurrence or a new primary relies on specific guidelines set forth by the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) program in conjunction with the Multiple Primary and Histology Rules (MP/H rules). In the case of tumor recurrence, the MP/H rules, rather than the pathologist's diagnosis or a physician's statements, dictate the classification protocol for tumors.

When tumors recur, the important aspect is to establish whether they are indeed recurrences of the same cancer or represent a new primary malignancy. The examination of the tumor's features, timing of the recurrence, and prior treatment history forms the basis for this decision in line with the MP/H rules. This is why relying solely on a physician's opinion or the pathologist’s results could lead to inconsistencies, as these statements are not definitive without the contextual backing of the established rules.

In this context, it becomes clear that the provided answers do not align with the protocol that governs the classification of recurrence versus new primary tumors according to the MP/H rules. Thus, the accurate understanding of the situation leads to the conclusion that neither statement is correct.