Return to Home Incidence > Table

Incidence Rates Table

Data Options

Incidence Rate Report for by County

Lung & Bronchus, 2008-2012

All Races (includes Hispanic), Female, All Ages

Sorted by Name
County
sort sort alphabetically by namedescending
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
North Carolina 6,10 56.1 (55.2, 57.0) 3,240 falling falling trend -1.6 (-2.7, -0.4)
US (SEER+NPCR) 1,10 54.1 (53.9, 54.2) 99,801 § falling falling trend -2.0 (-2.6, -1.5)
Alamance County 6,10 53.0 (46.7, 59.8) 54 stable stable trend -4.0 (-9.3, 1.7)
Alexander County 6,10 57.5 (44.7, 73.1) 14
*
*
Alleghany County 6,10 54.7 (35.9, 82.7) 5
*
*
Anson County 6,10 50.9 (36.5, 69.5) 9
*
*
Ashe County 6,10 46.4 (34.8, 61.6) 11
*
*
Avery County 6,10 40.6 (26.0, 61.9) 5
*
*
Beaufort County 6,10 67.9 (56.3, 81.5) 25 stable stable trend 7.7 (-17.8, 41.2)
Bertie County 6,10 45.3 (31.1, 64.6) 7
*
*
Bladen County 6,10 42.6 (31.7, 56.4) 11
*
*
Brunswick County 6,10 56.9 (49.8, 64.9) 52 stable stable trend 1.9 (-11.7, 17.6)
Buncombe County 6,10 54.8 (49.9, 60.2) 94 falling falling trend -6.2 (-11.8, -0.2)
Burke County 6,10 66.3 (57.6, 76.1) 43 stable stable trend 2.4 (-20.8, 32.3)
Cabarrus County 6,10 64.7 (57.6, 72.4) 62 stable stable trend -2.8 (-9.7, 4.6)
Caldwell County 6,10 69.9 (60.4, 80.6) 40 stable stable trend -8.0 (-18.1, 3.4)
Camden County 6,10
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Carteret County 6,10 65.1 (55.3, 76.3) 34 stable stable trend -5.1 (-31.9, 32.3)
Caswell County 6,10 46.0 (32.3, 64.4) 8
*
*
Catawba County 6,10 51.3 (45.1, 58.1) 51 stable stable trend -1.0 (-15.7, 16.2)
Chatham County 6,10 42.1 (34.4, 51.3) 22 stable stable trend -4.0 (-23.5, 20.4)
Cherokee County 6,10 44.7 (33.6, 59.4) 12
*
*
Chowan County 6,10 55.7 (37.9, 80.3) 7
*
*
Clay County 6,10 70.4 (48.7, 102.0) 7
*
*
Cleveland County 6,10 52.6 (45.0, 61.1) 36 stable stable trend -2.3 (-16.8, 14.6)
Columbus County 6,10 63.7 (52.7, 76.5) 25 stable stable trend 9.5 (-4.1, 25.0)
Craven County 6,10 64.7 (56.4, 74.1) 44 stable stable trend -4.3 (-18.5, 12.3)
Cumberland County 6,10 57.6 (52.3, 63.3) 89 stable stable trend 2.9 (-6.0, 12.5)
Currituck County 6,10 62.3 (44.7, 84.8) 9
*
*
Dare County 6,10 58.3 (44.8, 74.9) 13
*
*
Davidson County 6,10 68.8 (61.9, 76.3) 74 stable stable trend 3.6 (-15.2, 26.6)
Davie County 6,10 62.5 (50.4, 77.0) 19 stable stable trend 5.2 (-24.0, 45.7)
Duplin County 6,10 44.2 (35.2, 55.0) 17 stable stable trend -4.7 (-11.3, 2.5)
Durham County 6,10 57.2 (51.4, 63.4) 76 stable stable trend -5.1 (-14.3, 5.1)
Edgecombe County 6,10 46.3 (37.2, 57.2) 18 stable stable trend 5.0 (-5.7, 16.9)
Forsyth County 6,10 56.3 (51.9, 61.1) 122 stable stable trend -3.4 (-14.4, 8.9)
Franklin County 6,10 53.9 (43.7, 66.0) 20 stable stable trend -9.6 (-21.4, 4.1)
Gaston County 6,10 68.7 (62.5, 75.4) 91 stable stable trend 3.4 (-8.0, 16.2)
Gates County 6,10
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Graham County 6,10 42.7 (24.1, 73.3) 3
*
*
Granville County 6,10 61.8 (50.6, 75.0) 21 rising rising trend 8.2 (1.1, 15.8)
Greene County 6,10 59.1 (41.4, 82.3) 7
*
*
Guilford County 6,10 59.5 (55.5, 63.7) 172 falling falling trend -4.5 (-7.9, -0.9)
Halifax County 6,10 52.8 (43.2, 64.3) 21 stable stable trend -7.0 (-19.3, 7.3)
Harnett County 6,10 62.3 (53.5, 72.2) 36 stable stable trend -4.2 (-22.1, 17.7)
Haywood County 6,10 58.3 (48.9, 69.2) 29 stable stable trend 7.4 (-10.6, 29.1)
Henderson County 6,10 48.8 (42.6, 56.0) 47 stable stable trend -5.6 (-25.7, 19.9)
Hertford County 6,10 39.5 (27.6, 55.5) 7
*
*
Hoke County 6,10 69.6 (53.5, 88.8) 13
*
*
Hyde County 6,10
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Iredell County 6,10 56.2 (49.6, 63.4) 54 stable stable trend -5.4 (-16.3, 6.8)
Jackson County 6,10 55.6 (43.6, 70.3) 15 stable stable trend 0.6 (-30.3, 45.3)
Johnston County 6,10 50.0 (43.6, 57.1) 45 stable stable trend 6.9 (-4.6, 19.8)
Jones County 6,10 63.3 (41.6, 94.9) 5
*
*
Lee County 6,10 58.4 (47.6, 71.0) 21 stable stable trend -4.5 (-31.6, 33.3)
Lenoir County 6,10 65.9 (55.5, 77.9) 29 stable stable trend 1.2 (-7.6, 10.9)
Lincoln County 6,10 62.9 (53.2, 74.0) 31 stable stable trend -2.1 (-21.7, 22.5)
Macon County 6,10 59.1 (47.4, 73.7) 19 stable stable trend 5.6 (-12.2, 27.0)
Madison County 6,10 48.1 (34.0, 67.2) 8
*
*
Martin County 6,10 57.3 (42.8, 75.7) 11
*
*
McDowell County 6,10 64.3 (52.5, 78.4) 21 stable stable trend -9.3 (-24.3, 8.7)
Mecklenburg County 6,10 51.2 (48.1, 54.4) 214 stable stable trend -1.0 (-10.6, 9.7)
Mitchell County 6,10 45.0 (30.6, 65.8) 6
*
*
Montgomery County 6,10 54.6 (40.4, 72.7) 10
*
*
Moore County 6,10 57.9 (50.4, 66.4) 46 stable stable trend 7.2 (-4.1, 19.8)
Nash County 6,10 58.5 (50.2, 67.7) 37 stable stable trend 7.5 (-0.8, 16.4)
New Hanover County 6,10 58.5 (52.7, 64.8) 77 stable stable trend -0.8 (-15.7, 16.7)
Northampton County 6,10 52.9 (38.6, 71.8) 10
*
*
Onslow County 6,10 81.5 (71.9, 92.0) 53 stable stable trend -3.6 (-13.5, 7.6)
Orange County 6,10 51.7 (44.0, 60.4) 34 stable stable trend -6.1 (-15.4, 4.3)
Pamlico County 6,10 59.2 (40.6, 86.0) 7
*
*
Pasquotank County 6,10 58.0 (45.3, 73.3) 15 stable stable trend -2.0 (-18.9, 18.5)
Pender County 6,10 55.8 (45.1, 68.5) 19 stable stable trend -8.8 (-28.7, 16.6)
Perquimans County 6,10 47.4 (31.0, 71.4) 6
*
*
Person County 6,10 63.8 (50.8, 79.5) 17 stable stable trend -5.2 (-12.4, 2.6)
Pitt County 6,10 48.1 (41.5, 55.4) 39 rising rising trend 9.7 (1.7, 18.2)
Polk County 6,10 40.4 (28.5, 57.3) 8
*
*
Randolph County 6,10 64.9 (57.7, 72.8) 60 stable stable trend -5.3 (-11.6, 1.6)
Richmond County 6,10 66.0 (53.6, 80.8) 20 stable stable trend 3.7 (-15.7, 27.5)
Robeson County 6,10 50.1 (43.1, 57.9) 38 stable stable trend 3.6 (-8.4, 17.2)
Rockingham County 6,10 75.2 (66.3, 85.2) 52 stable stable trend -5.5 (-17.7, 8.6)
Rowan County 6,10 66.7 (59.3, 75.0) 59 stable stable trend -4.9 (-19.7, 12.5)
Rutherford County 6,10 55.1 (46.3, 65.4) 28 stable stable trend -1.7 (-29.8, 37.7)
Sampson County 6,10 54.0 (44.3, 65.2) 22 stable stable trend 10.8 (-2.4, 25.6)
Scotland County 6,10 64.9 (50.7, 82.0) 15 stable stable trend -16.7 (-33.6, 4.6)
Stanly County 6,10 60.6 (50.5, 72.4) 26 stable stable trend -0.5 (-25.5, 32.8)
Stokes County 6,10 62.4 (51.0, 76.0) 21 stable stable trend 6.9 (-12.6, 30.6)
Surry County 6,10 62.2 (53.0, 72.7) 34 stable stable trend -6.1 (-21.6, 12.3)
Swain County 6,10 66.9 (46.4, 94.5) 7
*
*
Transylvania County 6,10 34.0 (25.5, 45.4) 11
*
*
Tyrrell County 6,10
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Union County 6,10 47.2 (41.0, 54.0) 44 stable stable trend 3.9 (-6.2, 15.2)
Vance County 6,10 47.0 (36.8, 59.5) 15 stable stable trend 5.4 (-10.2, 23.6)
Wake County 6,10 48.3 (45.2, 51.6) 189 stable stable trend -3.4 (-7.5, 0.8)
Warren County 6,10 45.2 (31.8, 63.5) 8
*
*
Washington County 6,10 39.3 (23.7, 62.7) 4
*
*
Watauga County 6,10 43.2 (32.5, 56.6) 11
*
*
Wayne County 6,10 54.9 (47.6, 63.0) 41 stable stable trend 4.0 (-7.3, 16.6)
Wilkes County 6,10 61.5 (52.2, 72.2) 32 falling falling trend -13.6 (-21.7, -4.6)
Wilson County 6,10 50.1 (41.9, 59.4) 27 stable stable trend 5.5 (-24.5, 47.4)
Yadkin County 6,10 62.4 (49.7, 77.7) 17 stable stable trend -3.8 (-19.8, 15.3)
Yancey County 6,10 58.8 (41.8, 81.5) 8
*
*
Notes:
Created by statecancerprofiles.cancer.gov on 06/28/2016 2:49 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. If an average count of 3 is shown, the total number of cases for the time period is 16 or more which exceeds suppression threshold (but is rounded to 3).

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.


Return to Top