Return to Home Incidence > Table

Incidence Rates Table

Data Options

Incidence Rate Report for North Carolina by County

All Races (includes Hispanic), Both Sexes, Colon & Rectum, All Ages
Sorted by Rate
County
sort sort alphabetically by nameascending
Annual Incidence Rate
over rate period
(95% Confidence Interval)

sort sort by ratedescending
Average Annual Count
sort sort by countdescending
Rate Period
Recent Trend
Recent AAPC
sort sort by trenddescending
North Carolina 6,10 41.2 (40.7, 41.8) 4,129 2007-2011 falling falling trend -4.6 (-5.3, -4.0)
US (SEER+NPCR) 1,10 43.3 (43.2, 43.4) 142,173 § 2007-2011 falling falling trend -4.1 (-4.9, -3.3)
Pamlico County 6,10 25.5 (16.3, 38.9) 5 2007-2011 stable stable trend -11.1 (-23.2, 3.1)
Clay County 6,10 31.3 (20.8, 46.8) 6 2007-2011 stable stable trend -21.6 (-63.2, 66.9)
Haywood County 6,10 32.0 (26.9, 37.9) 29 2007-2011 stable stable trend -7.1 (-26.4, 17.3)
Davie County 6,10 32.7 (26.1, 40.7) 17 2007-2011 stable stable trend 14.6 (-4.2, 37.1)
Watauga County 6,10 32.9 (25.9, 41.2) 16 2007-2011 stable stable trend -10 (-33.2, 21.3)
Gates County 6,10 33.2 (21.1, 50.2) 5 2007-2011 stable stable trend -2 (-29.0, 35.1)
Stokes County 6,10 33.9 (27.5, 41.4) 20 2007-2011 stable stable trend -1.5 (-29.1, 37.0)
New Hanover County 6,10 34.7 (31.3, 38.4) 77 2007-2011 falling falling trend -6 (-9.4, -2.5)
Yadkin County 6,10 34.8 (27.7, 43.3) 17 2007-2011 stable stable trend -2.4 (-6.8, 2.2)
Moore County 6,10 34.9 (30.4, 40.0) 47 2007-2011 stable stable trend 5.1 (-3.9, 15.1)
Orange County 6,10 35.1 (30.3, 40.4) 41 2007-2011 stable stable trend -1.9 (-13.6, 11.3)
Brunswick County 6,10 35.1 (30.8, 39.9) 56 2007-2011 stable stable trend -9.5 (-18.5, 0.4)
Buncombe County 6,10 36.2 (33.1, 39.5) 107 2007-2011 stable stable trend -6.3 (-18.3, 7.5)
Wake County 6,10 36.5 (34.5, 38.6) 263 2007-2011 stable stable trend -5.3 (-14.1, 4.5)
Camden County 6,10 36.6 (21.4, 58.6) 4 2007-2011 stable stable trend -6.7 (-39.1, 43.0)
Chatham County 6,10 36.7 (31.0, 43.2) 31 2007-2011 stable stable trend -1.7 (-27.8, 33.8)
Duplin County 6,10 37.0 (30.7, 44.3) 25 2007-2011 stable stable trend 2.9 (-2.7, 8.8)
Greene County 6,10 37.0 (26.6, 50.3) 8 2007-2011 stable stable trend 1.3 (-12.0, 16.5)
Craven County 6,10 37.2 (32.4, 42.6) 44 2007-2011 stable stable trend -7.7 (-27.3, 17.1)
Transylvania County 6,10 37.2 (29.9, 46.2) 20 2007-2011 stable stable trend -0.8 (-23.2, 28.3)
Union County 6,10 37.3 (33.1, 41.8) 63 2007-2011 stable stable trend 0.3 (-20.9, 27.1)
Forsyth County 6,10 37.3 (34.5, 40.2) 139 2007-2011 stable stable trend -3.6 (-16.8, 11.7)
Polk County 6,10 37.4 (28.5, 48.9) 14 2007-2011 stable stable trend 8.3 (-6.7, 25.7)
Sampson County 6,10 37.8 (31.6, 44.8) 27 2007-2011 stable stable trend -7.7 (-23.2, 10.9)
Pender County 6,10 37.9 (31.2, 45.6) 23 2007-2011 falling falling trend -11.7 (-16.4, -6.6)
Mecklenburg County 6,10 37.9 (35.9, 40.0) 283 2007-2011 stable stable trend -4.6 (-12.8, 4.4)
Hoke County 6,10 37.9 (28.6, 49.2) 12 2007-2011 stable stable trend -19.2 (-36.8, 3.2)
Mitchell County 6,10 38.3 (27.2, 52.8) 8 2007-2011 stable stable trend -9.2 (-39.3, 35.9)
Catawba County 6,10 38.6 (34.5, 43.0) 67 2007-2011 stable stable trend -5.9 (-14.0, 2.9)
Henderson County 6,10 38.6 (34.4, 43.3) 65 2007-2011 stable stable trend 4.9 (-8.8, 20.7)
Ashe County 6,10 38.8 (30.5, 49.0) 16 2007-2011 stable stable trend -1.4 (-25.2, 30.1)
Avery County 6,10 39.0 (28.5, 52.4) 9 2007-2011 stable stable trend 13.4 (-8.7, 40.7)
Caldwell County 6,10 39.2 (33.8, 45.3) 39 2007-2011 stable stable trend -0.9 (-16.7, 17.8)
Harnett County 6,10 39.6 (34.3, 45.6) 40 2007-2011 stable stable trend -6.1 (-30.1, 26.1)
Anson County 6,10 39.7 (30.4, 51.0) 13 2007-2011 stable stable trend -5.2 (-15.5, 6.2)
Alamance County 6,10 40.2 (36.1, 44.7) 69 2007-2011 stable stable trend -4.7 (-16.2, 8.3)
Guilford County 6,10 40.2 (37.8, 42.9) 199 2007-2011 stable stable trend -6.2 (-12.0, 0.0)
Onslow County 6,10 40.3 (35.2, 46.0) 46 2007-2011 stable stable trend 1 (-16.9, 22.8)
Durham County 6,10 40.5 (36.8, 44.4) 93 2007-2011 stable stable trend 0.4 (-8.1, 9.6)
Stanly County 6,10 40.5 (34.2, 47.6) 30 2007-2011 stable stable trend -2.9 (-23.7, 23.7)
Robeson County 6,10 40.5 (35.6, 45.8) 53 2007-2011 stable stable trend -3.6 (-17.2, 12.2)
Columbus County 6,10 40.5 (34.0, 47.9) 29 2007-2011 stable stable trend -8.3 (-23.3, 9.6)
Cabarrus County 6,10 41.0 (36.8, 45.6) 70 2007-2011 stable stable trend -1.1 (-12.9, 12.4)
Lincoln County 6,10 41.1 (35.0, 47.9) 34 2007-2011 stable stable trend -11.5 (-30.2, 12.1)
Cumberland County 6,10 41.2 (37.7, 44.8) 109 2007-2011 stable stable trend -6.6 (-14.9, 2.5)
Perquimans County 6,10 41.4 (29.9, 56.7) 9 2007-2011 stable stable trend -13.6 (-38.5, 21.6)
Pitt County 6,10 41.7 (37.0, 46.8) 59 2007-2011 stable stable trend -11.8 (-22.6, 0.6)
Graham County 6,10 41.8 (26.4, 63.7) 5 2007-2011 stable stable trend -14.1 (-34.4, 12.3)
Edgecombe County 6,10 42.0 (35.2, 49.7) 28 2007-2011 stable stable trend -11.4 (-30.1, 12.2)
Randolph County 6,10 42.1 (37.6, 46.9) 66 2007-2011 falling falling trend -7.9 (-14.6, -0.6)
Martin County 6,10 42.1 (32.8, 53.4) 15 2007-2011 stable stable trend -1.3 (-13.5, 12.8)
Macon County 6,10 42.3 (34.6, 51.5) 23 2007-2011 stable stable trend 1.4 (-24.4, 36.1)
Johnston County 6,10 42.4 (37.6, 47.5) 62 2007-2011 stable stable trend -8.4 (-23.6, 9.9)
Cherokee County 6,10 42.8 (34.6, 52.9) 20 2007-2011 stable stable trend -14.4 (-29.2, 3.5)
Madison County 6,10 42.9 (32.7, 55.6) 12 2007-2011 stable stable trend 10.6 (-14.8, 43.6)
Chowan County 6,10 42.9 (31.3, 58.0) 9 2007-2011 stable stable trend 0.5 (-18.1, 23.3)
Davidson County 6,10 44.1 (39.9, 48.6) 83 2007-2011 stable stable trend -4.3 (-16.3, 9.4)
Surry County 6,10 44.4 (38.5, 51.0) 42 2007-2011 stable stable trend -7.4 (-26.1, 15.9)
Yancey County 6,10 44.4 (33.5, 58.3) 12 2007-2011 falling falling trend -19 (-27.2, -9.9)
Franklin County 6,10 44.4 (37.2, 52.6) 28 2007-2011 falling falling trend -7.8 (-11.9, -3.4)
Wilson County 6,10 44.4 (38.5, 51.0) 41 2007-2011 stable stable trend -1 (-17.3, 18.6)
Richmond County 6,10 44.6 (36.8, 53.6) 24 2007-2011 stable stable trend -2.7 (-20.1, 18.4)
Jackson County 6,10 44.7 (36.0, 54.8) 20 2007-2011 stable stable trend -2.2 (-19.9, 19.5)
Iredell County 6,10 44.8 (40.3, 49.6) 76 2007-2011 stable stable trend -6.9 (-15.6, 2.6)
Rowan County 6,10 44.8 (40.2, 49.8) 71 2007-2011 stable stable trend 1 (-20.4, 28.2)
Alleghany County 6,10 45.0 (31.5, 63.3) 8 2007-2011 stable stable trend 1.4 (-13.0, 18.2)
Wilkes County 6,10 45.0 (38.9, 51.9) 40 2007-2011 falling falling trend -13 (-18.6, -7.0)
Currituck County 6,10 45.1 (33.6, 59.3) 11 2007-2011 stable stable trend -12.2 (-36.6, 21.6)
Bladen County 6,10 45.3 (36.6, 55.5) 20 2007-2011 stable stable trend 4.1 (-36.3, 69.9)
Dare County 6,10 45.3 (36.3, 56.0) 18 2007-2011 stable stable trend -1.8 (-22.6, 24.6)
Rutherford County 6,10 46.3 (40.2, 53.3) 42 2007-2011 stable stable trend -10.3 (-24.3, 6.3)
Northampton County 6,10 46.5 (36.2, 59.2) 15 2007-2011 stable stable trend 3.8 (-18.4, 32.2)
Montgomery County 6,10 46.6 (36.8, 58.3) 16 2007-2011 stable stable trend 11.4 (-15.0, 46.0)
Wayne County 6,10 46.6 (41.5, 52.3) 60 2007-2011 stable stable trend -2.5 (-12.8, 8.9)
Halifax County 6,10 47.0 (40.1, 55.0) 33 2007-2011 stable stable trend 6 (-3.2, 15.9)
Carteret County 6,10 47.4 (41.2, 54.3) 44 2007-2011 stable stable trend -6.6 (-14.9, 2.4)
Hertford County 6,10 47.9 (37.4, 60.7) 15 2007-2011 stable stable trend -10.9 (-31.2, 15.4)
Nash County 6,10 48.2 (42.5, 54.5) 53 2007-2011 stable stable trend -1.4 (-19.4, 20.5)
Lee County 6,10 48.7 (41.2, 57.3) 30 2007-2011 stable stable trend 6.7 (-0.4, 14.3)
Jones County 6,10 48.8 (33.1, 70.1) 7 2007-2011 stable stable trend -16.7 (-44.1, 24.2)
Bertie County 6,10 49.5 (38.3, 63.2) 14 2007-2011 stable stable trend -6.5 (-23.1, 13.7)
Cleveland County 6,10 49.8 (44.1, 55.9) 58 2007-2011 stable stable trend -2.9 (-15.0, 10.8)
Gaston County 6,10 50.0 (45.9, 54.4) 112 2007-2011 stable stable trend -5.6 (-16.2, 6.3)
Scotland County 6,10 50.6 (41.0, 61.8) 20 2007-2011 stable stable trend -8.1 (-27.0, 15.6)
Caswell County 6,10 50.7 (39.9, 63.9) 16 2007-2011 stable stable trend -6.2 (-28.7, 23.4)
Rockingham County 6,10 51.2 (45.5, 57.4) 61 2007-2011 stable stable trend -8.6 (-20.1, 4.7)
Burke County 6,10 51.5 (45.6, 57.9) 58 2007-2011 stable stable trend -3.4 (-19.3, 15.6)
Alexander County 6,10 51.7 (42.3, 62.5) 22 2007-2011 stable stable trend -7.9 (-21.3, 7.8)
Pasquotank County 6,10 51.7 (42.5, 62.2) 23 2007-2011 stable stable trend 3.1 (-12.1, 21.0)
Person County 6,10 53.0 (44.0, 63.4) 25 2007-2011 stable stable trend -5.4 (-14.3, 4.3)
Washington County 6,10 53.2 (39.0, 71.4) 10 2007-2011 stable stable trend 3.2 (-26.6, 45.2)
McDowell County 6,10 54.6 (46.2, 64.2) 31 2007-2011 stable stable trend -2.2 (-17.2, 15.6)
Lenoir County 6,10 54.7 (47.3, 63.0) 40 2007-2011 stable stable trend -9.3 (-25.1, 9.7)
Granville County 6,10 56.1 (48.2, 65.1) 37 2007-2011 stable stable trend -13.5 (-26.0, 1.1)
Beaufort County 6,10 56.3 (48.1, 65.7) 35 2007-2011 stable stable trend -5.5 (-22.1, 14.6)
Warren County 6,10 57.5 (45.0, 72.5) 16 2007-2011 stable stable trend -10.2 (-32.1, 18.8)
Vance County 6,10 57.5 (48.5, 67.9) 29 2007-2011 stable stable trend 2.6 (-11.5, 19.1)
Swain County 6,10 59.6 (44.1, 79.1) 10 2007-2011 stable stable trend 8.5 (-27.5, 62.5)
Hyde County 6,10 68.5 (43.0, 104.3) 5 2007-2011 stable stable trend 6.2 (-34.5, 72.2)
Tyrrell County 6,10
*
3 or fewer
2007-2011 * *
Notes:
Created by statecancerprofiles.cancer.gov on 10/01/2014 12:01 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 1969-2012 US Population Data File is used for SEER and NPCR incidence rates.
§ 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 2013 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 2013 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) January 2014 data submission and SEER November 2013 submission.
6 Source: State Cancer Registry and the CDC's National Program of Cancer Registries Cancer Surveillance System (NPCR-CSS) January 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 1969-2012 US Population Data File is used with NPCR January 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 EAPCs 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