Return to Home Incidence > Table

Incidence Rates Table

Data Options

Incidence Rate Report by State

Melanoma of the Skin, 2008-2012

All Races (includes Hispanic), Female, All Ages

Sorted by Count
State
sort sort alphabetically by nameascending
Age-Adjusted Incidence Rate
cases per 100,000
(95% Confidence Interval)
sort sort by ratedescending
Average Annual Count
sort sort by countdescending
Recent Trend
Recent 5-Year Trend in Incidence Rates
(95% Confidence Interval)
sort sort by trenddescending
US (SEER+NPCR) 1,10 15.9 (15.8, 16.0) 27,524 § stable stable trend -0.2 (-1.5, 1.2)
District of Columbia 6,10 6.0 (4.9, 7.3) 21 stable stable trend -1.2 (-28.6, 36.7)
Alaska 6,10 11.1 (9.5, 13.0) 36 rising rising trend 12.6 (5.8, 19.7)
Wyoming 6,10 19.9 (17.6, 22.4) 59 stable stable trend 0.4 (-21.2, 28.0)
North Dakota 6,10 20.4 (18.3, 22.6) 74 stable stable trend 0.5 (-10.6, 13.1)
South Dakota 6,10 17.8 (16.0, 19.7) 78 rising rising trend 12.5 (3.4, 22.4)
Vermont 6,10 24.7 (22.4, 27.1) 94 stable stable trend 1.2 (-14.4, 19.6)
Hawaii 3,8 14.2 (13.0, 15.5) 113 stable stable trend -0.6 (-3.8, 2.8)
Montana 6,10 20.3 (18.6, 22.1) 113 stable stable trend 3.8 (-2.5, 10.6)
Delaware 6,10 22.2 (20.4, 24.1) 119 stable stable trend 5.0 (-7.6, 19.4)
Rhode Island 6,10 18.8 (17.2, 20.4) 119 stable stable trend 1.3 (-9.0, 12.7)
Nebraska 6,10 16.1 (14.9, 17.2) 159 stable stable trend 1.0 (-6.7, 9.3)
Maine 6,10 19.1 (17.8, 20.5) 161 stable stable trend 2.5 (-2.4, 7.6)
Idaho 6,10 20.1 (18.7, 21.6) 162 stable stable trend 6.1 (-8.9, 23.5)
New Mexico 3,8 14.1 (13.1, 15.1) 162 stable stable trend 0.9 (-0.1, 2.0)
New Hampshire 6,10 23.0 (21.5, 24.7) 179 stable stable trend -0.7 (-11.3, 11.1)
West Virginia 6,10 18.0 (16.8, 19.2) 194 stable stable trend 1.8 (-7.1, 11.6)
Arkansas 6,10 12.8 (12.1, 13.7) 214 stable stable trend 6.1 (-5.4, 19.2)
Mississippi 6,10 13.2 (12.4, 14.0) 216 stable stable trend -0.7 (-8.0, 7.3)
Oklahoma 6,10 12.8 (12.1, 13.6) 266 stable stable trend 1.1 (-9.1, 12.4)
Louisiana 3,9 11.2 (10.6, 11.8) 275 stable stable trend 0.7 (-10.2, 12.9)
Utah 3,8 24.1 (22.9, 25.4) 291 rising rising trend 3.6 (3.0, 4.2)
Kansas 6,10 19.4 (18.4, 20.4) 297 stable stable trend 0.8 (-3.6, 5.3)
Iowa 3,8 21.4 (20.4, 22.5) 357 rising rising trend 3.4 (2.8, 4.0)
Connecticut 3,8 17.8 (17.0, 18.6) 389 falling falling trend -6.0 (-9.4, -2.5)
Arizona 6,10 12.4 (11.9, 12.9) 439 stable stable trend -2.5 (-17.1, 14.7)
Alabama 6,10 16.4 (15.7, 17.1) 453 stable stable trend 0.6 (-6.3, 8.1)
Colorado 6,10 17.7 (17.0, 18.5) 468 stable stable trend -0.8 (-4.1, 2.6)
Missouri 6,10 14.1 (13.5, 14.7) 474 stable stable trend -1.1 (-7.0, 5.3)
South Carolina 6,10 18.2 (17.5, 19.0) 483 stable stable trend -3.8 (-10.6, 3.6)
Kentucky 3,9 19.8 (19.0, 20.6) 483 stable stable trend 3.3 (-0.4, 7.1)
Oregon 6,10 24.3 (23.3, 25.3) 525 stable stable trend -1.3 (-9.0, 7.1)
Maryland 6,10 16.1 (15.4, 16.7) 529 stable stable trend -1.5 (-7.8, 5.2)
Indiana 6,10 15.2 (14.6, 15.8) 540 stable stable trend -0.0 (-7.6, 8.2)
Wisconsin 6,10 18.1 (17.4, 18.8) 571 stable stable trend 5.3 (-1.9, 13.1)
Tennessee 6,10 16.5 (15.9, 17.2) 599 stable stable trend -1.4 (-11.1, 9.3)
Virginia 6,10 14.4 (13.9, 14.9) 640 stable stable trend -4.4 (-10.5, 2.0)
Minnesota 6,10 24.5 (23.7, 25.4) 700 stable stable trend 3.0 (-2.6, 8.9)
Massachusetts 6,10 18.3 (17.7, 18.9) 720 stable stable trend -3.8 (-7.4, 0.0)
Washington 5,10 22.6 (21.9, 23.3) 822 stable stable trend -0.4 (-7.5, 7.3)
New Jersey 3,8 16.9 (16.4, 17.4) 883 stable stable trend -1.8 (-4.9, 1.5)
Michigan 5,10 16.0 # (15.5, 16.5) 890 falling falling trend -5.8 (-11.2, -0.1)
Georgia 3,9 17.8 (17.3, 18.3) 904 rising rising trend 5.6 (2.1, 9.2)
North Carolina 6,10 17.9 (17.4, 18.4) 960 stable stable trend -0.8 (-7.3, 6.0)
Illinois 6,10 14.9 (14.5, 15.3) 1,044 stable stable trend 1.4 (-2.7, 5.8)
Ohio 6,10 17.0 (16.5, 17.5) 1,110 stable stable trend -2.2 (-6.6, 2.3)
Texas 6,10 9.6 (9.4, 9.9) 1,210 stable stable trend -3.5 (-7.1, 0.1)
Pennsylvania 6,10 17.0 (16.5, 17.4) 1,303 stable stable trend 2.7 (-3.3, 9.0)
New York 6,10 14.1 (13.7, 14.4) 1,607 stable stable trend 0.5 (-3.4, 4.6)
Florida 6,10 14.6 (14.3, 14.9) 1,769 stable stable trend 2.0 (-4.1, 8.4)
California 3,9 15.6 (15.4, 15.9) 3,088 stable stable trend -1.0 (-3.0, 1.0)
Nevada 6
¶¶
¶¶
¶¶
¶¶
Notes:
Created by statecancerprofiles.cancer.gov on 05/26/2016 6:39 am.
Data for the United States does not include data from Nevada.
State Cancer Registries may provide more current or more local data.
† Incidence rates (cases per 100,000 population per year) are age-adjusted to the 2000 US standard population (19 age groups: <1, 1-4, 5-9, ... , 80-84, 85+). Rates are for invasive cancer only (except for bladder cancer which is invasive and in situ) or unless otherwise specified. Rates calculated using SEER*Stat. Population counts for denominators are based on Census populations as modified by NCI. The 1969-2013 US Population Data File is used for SEER and NPCR incidence rates.
‡ Incidence data come from different sources. Due to different years of data availability, most of the trends are AAPCs based on APCs but some are APCs calculated in SEER*Stat. Please refer to the source for each area for additional information.
§ The total count for the US (SEER+NPCR) may differ from the summation of the individual states reported in this table. The total uses data from the CDC's National Program of Cancer Registries Cancer Surveillance System (NPCR-CSS) January 2015 data submission for the following states: California, Kentucky, Louisiana, and New Jersey but data for those states when shown individually are sourced from the SEER November 2014 submission.
# Data do not include cases diagnosed in other states for those states in which the data exchange agreement specifically prohibits the release of data to third parties.
¶¶ Data not available for Nevada.

1 Source: CDC's National Program of Cancer Registries Cancer Surveillance System (NPCR-CSS) November 2014 data submission and SEER November 2014 submission.
3 Source: SEER November 2014 submission. State Cancer Registry also receives funding from CDC's National Program of Cancer Registries.
5 Source: State Cancer Registry and the CDC's National Program of Cancer Registries Cancer Surveillance System (NPCR-CSS) November 2014 data submission. State rates include rates from metropolitan areas funded by SEER.
6 Source: State Cancer Registry and the CDC's National Program of Cancer Registries Cancer Surveillance System (NPCR-CSS) November 2014 data submission. State rates include rates from metropolitan areas funded by SEER.
8 Source: Incidence data provided by the SEER Program. AAPCs are calculated by the Joinpoint Regression Program and are based on APCs. Data are age-adjusted to the 2000 US standard population (19 age groups: <1, 1-4, 5-9, ... , 80-84,85+). Rates are for invasive cancer only (except for bladder cancer which is invasive and in situ) or unless otherwise specified. Population counts for denominators are based on Census populations as modifed by NCI. The 1969-2013 US Population Data File is used with SEER November 2014 data.
9 Source: Incidence data provided by the SEER Program. EAPCs calculated by the National Cancer Institute using SEER*Stat. Rates are age-adjusted to the 2000 US standard population (19 age groups: <1, 1-4, 5-9, ... , 80-84,85+). Rates are for invasive cancer only (except for bladder cancer which is invasive and in situ) or unless otherwise specified. Population counts for denominators are based on Census populations as modifed by NCI. 1969-2013 US Population Data File is used with SEER November 2014 data.
10 Source: Incidence data provided by the National Program of Cancer Registries (NPCR). EAPCs calculated by the National Cancer Institute using SEER*Stat. Rates are age-adjusted to the 2000 US standard population (19 age groups: <1, 1-4, 5-9, ... , 80-84,85+). Rates are for invasive cancer only (except for bladder cancer which is invasive and in situ) or unless otherwise specified. Population counts for denominators are based on Census populations as modified by NCI. The 1969-2013 US Population Data File is used with NPCR November 2014 data.

Please note that the data comes from different sources. Due to different years of data availablility, most of the trends are AAPCs based on APCs but some are APCs calculated in SEER*Stat. Please refer to the source for each graph for additional information.

Interpret Rankings provides insight into interpreting cancer incidence statistics. When the population size for a denominator is small, the rates may be unstable. A rate is unstable when a small change in the numerator (e.g., only one or two additional cases) has a dramatic effect on the calculated rate.

Data not available for this combination of geography, cancer site, age, and race/ethnicity.

Return to Top