Return to Home Incidence > Table

Incidence Rates Table

Data Options

Incidence Rate Report for Alabama by County

All Races (includes Hispanic), Female, Lung & Bronchus, All Ages
Sorted by Rate
County
sort sort alphabetically by nameascending
Annual Incidence Rate
over rate period
(95% Confidence Interval)

sort sort by rateascending
Average Annual Count
over rate period
sort sort by countdescending
Rate Period
Recent Trend
Recent 5-Year Trend in Incidence Rates
(95% Confidence Interval)
sort sort by trenddescending
Alabama 6,10 54.2 (53.0, 55.4) 1,647 2008-2012 stable stable trend -1.4 (-4.8, 2.2)
US (SEER+NPCR) 1,10 54.1 (53.9, 54.2) 99,801 § 2008-2012 falling falling trend -2.0 (-2.6, -1.5)
Bibb County 6,10 82.2 (61.9, 107.5) 11 2008-2012 * *
Walker County 6,10 77.6 (66.7, 89.9) 38 2008-2012 stable stable trend 6.8 (-11.0, 28.0)
Covington County 6,10 75.4 (61.4, 92.0) 21 2008-2012 stable stable trend 2.7 (-14.6, 23.6)
Cleburne County 6,10 71.9 (49.5, 101.7) 7 2008-2012 * *
Lamar County 6,10 69.7 (49.2, 97.2) 8 2008-2012 * *
Winston County 6,10 69.6 (53.5, 89.7) 13 2008-2012 * *
Cherokee County 6,10 66.8 (51.6, 85.9) 14 2008-2012 * *
Lawrence County 6,10 65.5 (51.1, 83.0) 14 2008-2012 * *
Fayette County 6,10 65.4 (47.2, 89.5) 9 2008-2012 * *
Dale County 6,10 65.2 (53.1, 79.4) 21 2008-2012 stable stable trend 2.4 (-10.0, 16.5)
Marshall County 6,10 64.8 (56.0, 74.7) 39 2008-2012 stable stable trend -6.9 (-23.2, 13.0)
Etowah County 6,10 64.5 (56.5, 73.5) 48 2008-2012 stable stable trend -0.8 (-18.9, 21.4)
Morgan County 6,10 63.5 (55.8, 72.1) 50 2008-2012 stable stable trend 0.5 (-19.1, 24.8)
Geneva County 6,10 63.4 (48.9, 81.5) 13 2008-2012 * *
Calhoun County 6,10 62.1 (54.4, 70.5) 49 2008-2012 stable stable trend -1.3 (-19.8, 21.5)
Clay County 6,10 61.9 (41.6, 89.8) 6 2008-2012 * *
Autauga County 6,10 60.8 (49.0, 74.7) 19 2008-2012 stable stable trend 5.4 (-16.6, 33.2)
Franklin County 6,10 60.6 (46.4, 78.0) 13 2008-2012 * *
Chambers County 6,10 60.5 (47.4, 76.5) 15 2008-2012 stable stable trend -5.5 (-26.9, 22.0)
Chilton County 6,10 59.5 (47.2, 74.2) 16 2008-2012 stable stable trend -25.6 (-45.4, 1.4)
St. Clair County 6,10 59.4 (50.2, 69.9) 30 2008-2012 stable stable trend -0.7 (-19.0, 21.7)
Mobile County 6,10 59.3 (55.0, 63.7) 150 2008-2012 stable stable trend -2.0 (-5.1, 1.2)
Blount County 6,10 58.7 (48.3, 71.0) 23 2008-2012 stable stable trend -2.9 (-16.1, 12.2)
Coosa County 6,10 58.7 (37.8, 89.0) 5 2008-2012 * *
Randolph County 6,10 58.0 (42.2, 78.3) 9 2008-2012 * *
Limestone County 6,10 57.7 (48.5, 68.1) 29 2008-2012 rising rising trend 4.5 (0.6, 8.6)
Russell County 6,10 57.6 (46.4, 70.6) 19 2008-2012 stable stable trend -1.0 (-24.4, 29.5)
Jackson County 6,10 56.6 (46.2, 68.9) 21 2008-2012 stable stable trend -7.5 (-16.4, 2.5)
Colbert County 6,10 56.2 (46.2, 68.0) 23 2008-2012 stable stable trend -2.8 (-14.8, 10.9)
Barbour County 6,10 56.1 (41.2, 75.2) 10 2008-2012 * *
Houston County 6,10 55.1 (47.4, 63.8) 37 2008-2012 stable stable trend 2.1 (-21.3, 32.3)
Talladega County 6,10 54.7 (46.1, 64.6) 29 2008-2012 stable stable trend -10.7 (-21.8, 2.0)
Elmore County 6,10 54.1 (44.8, 64.9) 25 2008-2012 stable stable trend -2.1 (-17.8, 16.5)
Madison County 6,10 54.1 (49.5, 59.0) 105 2008-2012 stable stable trend -3.1 (-11.3, 5.9)
Baldwin County 6,10 54.0 (48.5, 60.1) 70 2008-2012 stable stable trend -2.1 (-15.2, 12.9)
Escambia County 6,10 53.9 (41.7, 68.9) 14 2008-2012 * *
Coffee County 6,10 53.8 (43.1, 66.6) 18 2008-2012 stable stable trend -11.6 (-26.9, 6.9)
Washington County 6,10 53.5 (35.9, 77.5) 6 2008-2012 * *
Tallapoosa County 6,10 53.4 (42.2, 67.0) 16 2008-2012 stable stable trend 10.7 (-17.7, 48.8)
Lowndes County 6,10 51.3 (30.6, 81.5) 4 2008-2012 * *
Dallas County 6,10 50.8 (39.5, 64.4) 14 2008-2012 * *
Shelby County 6,10 49.7 (43.6, 56.5) 49 2008-2012 stable stable trend -7.8 (-18.4, 4.2)
Lauderdale County 6,10 49.2 (42.0, 57.5) 34 2008-2012 stable stable trend -10.4 (-28.9, 12.9)
Tuscaloosa County 6,10 48.6 (42.7, 55.1) 50 2008-2012 stable stable trend 1.3 (-17.3, 24.1)
Montgomery County 6,10 48.3 (43.1, 54.0) 64 2008-2012 stable stable trend -6.5 (-20.0, 9.4)
Jefferson County 6,10 47.8 (44.9, 50.9) 202 2008-2012 stable stable trend 1.7 (-4.4, 8.1)
DeKalb County 6,10 47.6 (38.9, 57.8) 21 2008-2012 stable stable trend 2.7 (-9.8, 16.9)
Clarke County 6,10 47.5 (34.5, 64.2) 9 2008-2012 * *
Cullman County 6,10 47.0 (39.3, 55.9) 27 2008-2012 stable stable trend -1.6 (-20.5, 21.8)
Lee County 6,10 46.6 (39.2, 54.9) 29 2008-2012 stable stable trend -0.7 (-16.5, 18.0)
Pike County 6,10 45.8 (32.9, 62.2) 9 2008-2012 * *
Pickens County 6,10 45.1 (31.4, 63.7) 7 2008-2012 * *
Crenshaw County 6,10 43.7 (26.8, 68.2) 4 2008-2012 * *
Wilcox County 6,10 41.8 (24.0, 68.8) 3 2008-2012 * *
Henry County 6,10 41.8 (27.8, 61.7) 6 2008-2012 * *
Conecuh County 6,10 40.9 (24.0, 66.2) 4 2008-2012 * *
Monroe County 6,10 40.2 (27.5, 57.3) 7 2008-2012 * *
Hale County 6,10 40.1 (24.6, 62.3) 4 2008-2012 * *
Marion County 6,10 38.2 (27.9, 51.6) 9 2008-2012 * *
Butler County 6,10 34.6 (22.9, 51.0) 6 2008-2012 * *
Macon County 6,10 33.4 (20.8, 51.2) 5 2008-2012 * *
Choctaw County 6,10 31.6 (18.5, 52.3) 4 2008-2012 * *
Marengo County 6,10 31.2 (20.1, 47.0) 5 2008-2012 * *
Bullock County 6,10
*
3 or fewer
2008-2012 * *
Greene County 6,10
*
3 or fewer
2008-2012 * *
Perry County 6,10
*
3 or fewer
2008-2012 * *
Sumter County 6,10
*
3 or fewer
2008-2012 * *
Notes:
Created by statecancerprofiles.cancer.gov on 07/28/2015 5:44 pm.
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 has been suppressed to ensure confidentiality and stability of rate estimates. Counts are suppressed if fewer than 16 cases were reported in a specific area-sex-race category.

1 Source: CDC's National Program of Cancer Registries Cancer Surveillance System (NPCR-CSS) November 2014 data submission and SEER November 2014 submission.
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.
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.

Suppression is used to avoid misinterpretation when rates are unstable.

Return to Top