Return to Home Mortality > Table

Death Rates Table

Data Options
Comparison Options

Death Rate Report for Minnesota by County

Pancreas, 2019-2023

All Races (includes Hispanic), Both Sexes, All Ages

Sorted by Recentaapc

County
 sort alphabetically by name ascending
2023 Rural-Urban Continuum Codes Φ
 sort by rural urban descending
Met Healthy People Objective of ***?
Age-Adjusted Death Rate
deaths per 100,000
(95% Confidence Interval)
 sort by rate descending
CI*Rank ⋔
(95% Confidence Interval)
 sort by CI rank descending
Average Annual Count
 sort by count descending
Recent Trend
Recent 5-Year Trend in Death Rates
(95% Confidence Interval)
 sort by trend descending
Minnesota N/A *** 11.3 (10.9, 11.6) N/A 821 rising rising trend 0.5 (0.2, 0.8)
United States N/A *** 11.3 (11.2, 11.3) N/A 47,667 stable stable trend -0.3 (-0.8, 0.2)
Aitkin County Rural *** 8.8 (5.1, 16.5) 51 (5, 55) 3 stable stable trend -2.8 (-5.7, 0.1)
Crow Wing County Rural *** 9.8 (7.4, 13.0) 45 (10, 55) 11 falling falling trend -2.5 (-4.7, -0.3)
Winona County Rural *** 10.5 (7.3, 14.8) 39 (5, 55) 7 stable stable trend -2.1 (-4.9, 0.5)
Mower County Rural *** 8.5 (5.4, 13.0) 52 (10, 55) 4 stable stable trend -1.5 (-3.8, 0.6)
Carver County Urban *** 9.7 (7.3, 12.7) 48 (11, 55) 11 stable stable trend -1.4 (-3.6, 1.4)
Fillmore County Urban *** 11.0 (6.6, 17.8) 32 (2, 55) 3 stable stable trend -1.1 (-5.4, 3.1)
Chisago County Urban *** 11.0 (7.8, 15.3) 31 (4, 55) 8 stable stable trend -0.8 (-2.7, 1.4)
Olmsted County Urban *** 10.2 (8.3, 12.4) 43 (13, 54) 20 stable stable trend -0.6 (-2.3, 1.2)
St. Louis County Urban *** 11.8 (10.1, 13.8) 22 (8, 48) 35 stable stable trend -0.6 (-1.7, 0.5)
Scott County Urban *** 10.9 (8.6, 13.6) 33 (7, 53) 16 stable stable trend -0.5 (-2.2, 1.7)
Itasca County Rural *** 10.5 (7.4, 14.8) 40 (5, 55) 8 stable stable trend -0.4 (-2.7, 2.0)
Clay County Urban *** 10.7 (7.6, 14.7) 35 (5, 55) 7 stable stable trend -0.2 (-16.9, 2.9)
Otter Tail County Rural *** 12.5 (9.6, 16.1) 18 (2, 51) 14 stable stable trend -0.2 (-2.2, 1.9)
Blue Earth County Urban *** 9.6 (6.7, 13.5) 49 (8, 55) 7 stable stable trend -0.1 (-2.6, 2.9)
Brown County Rural *** 12.4 (7.7, 19.2) 20 (1, 55) 4 stable stable trend 0.2 (-2.4, 2.9)
Cass County Rural *** 12.0 (8.0, 17.8) 21 (1, 55) 6 stable stable trend 0.3 (-3.3, 4.2)
Ramsey County Urban *** 11.5 (10.3, 12.8) 26 (12, 44) 73 stable stable trend 0.3 (-0.5, 1.1)
Wright County Urban *** 10.9 (8.7, 13.5) 34 (8, 53) 17 stable stable trend 0.3 (-1.2, 2.1)
Beltrami County Rural *** 9.3 (6.0, 13.9) 50 (7, 55) 5 stable stable trend 0.4 (-2.2, 3.5)
Dakota County Urban *** 10.0 (8.9, 11.4) 44 (21, 52) 52 stable stable trend 0.4 (-0.8, 1.9)
Carlton County Urban *** 15.5 (11.1, 21.4) 5 (1, 47) 8 stable stable trend 0.5 (-2.5, 3.8)
Todd County Rural *** 8.2 (4.8, 13.5) 54 (10, 55) 3 stable stable trend 0.5 (-2.3, 3.9)
Benton County Urban *** 11.7 (7.8, 17.0) 23 (2, 55) 5 stable stable trend 0.6 (-2.7, 4.5)
Hennepin County Urban *** 11.4 (10.6, 12.2) 28 (15, 41) 165 stable stable trend 0.6 (0.0, 1.1)
Steele County Rural *** 8.3 (5.2, 12.8) 53 (11, 55) 4 stable stable trend 0.6 (-2.5, 4.1)
Wabasha County Urban *** 12.5 (7.9, 19.5) 17 (1, 55) 4 stable stable trend 0.8 (-2.7, 5.1)
Washington County Urban *** 11.6 (10.0, 13.3) 25 (9, 46) 39 stable stable trend 0.8 (-0.5, 2.5)
Anoka County Urban *** 11.3 (9.9, 12.8) 29 (11, 47) 48 stable stable trend 1.0 (-0.3, 2.6)
Mille Lacs County Urban *** 14.4 (9.4, 21.4) 8 (1, 53) 5 stable stable trend 1.0 (-1.6, 3.9)
Polk County Urban *** 11.5 (7.4, 17.2) 27 (2, 55) 5 stable stable trend 1.1 (-2.7, 5.7)
Rice County Rural *** 11.6 (8.5, 15.6) 24 (3, 54) 9 stable stable trend 1.3 (-1.3, 4.7)
Morrison County Rural *** 13.3 (9.2, 19.0) 14 (1, 54) 7 stable stable trend 1.4 (-1.8, 5.3)
Douglas County Rural *** 14.1 (10.1, 19.3) 10 (1, 50) 9 stable stable trend 1.5 (-1.9, 5.8)
Sherburne County Urban *** 12.7 (9.6, 16.5) 16 (2, 52) 12 stable stable trend 1.6 (-0.9, 4.8)
Kandiyohi County Rural *** 13.4 (9.7, 18.2) 13 (1, 52) 8 stable stable trend 1.7 (-0.8, 5.1)
Hubbard County Rural *** 13.5 (8.9, 20.4) 11 (1, 54) 5 stable stable trend 2.0 (-0.3, 5.1)
McLeod County Rural *** 13.2 (9.0, 18.8) 15 (1, 54) 6 stable stable trend 2.1 (-0.3, 5.3)
Stearns County Urban *** 9.8 (7.8, 12.0) 46 (14, 54) 18 stable stable trend 5.0 (-1.1, 13.7)
Sibley County Rural *** 17.2 (10.0, 28.0) 2 (1, 54) 3 rising rising trend 22.4 (5.3, 54.6)
Becker County Rural *** 10.7 (7.1, 15.7) 37 (3, 55) 6
*
*
Freeborn County Rural *** 6.7 (4.0, 11.0) 55 (22, 55) 3
*
*
Goodhue County Rural *** 10.3 (7.2, 14.6) 41 (5, 55) 7
*
*
Houston County Urban *** 10.3 (5.8, 17.7) 42 (2, 55) 3
*
*
Isanti County Urban *** 10.7 (7.0, 15.7) 36 (3, 55) 5
*
*
Kanabec County Rural *** 14.5 (8.4, 24.0) 7 (1, 55) 3
*
*
Koochiching County Rural *** 18.8 (12.0, 29.9) 1 (1, 47) 4
*
*
Le Sueur County Urban *** 12.4 (7.9, 18.9) 19 (1, 55) 4
*
*
Lyon County Rural *** 15.8 (10.1, 23.8) 4 (1, 53) 5
*
*
Martin County Rural *** 9.8 (5.7, 16.3) 47 (4, 55) 3
*
*
Meeker County Rural *** 11.0 (6.7, 17.6) 30 (2, 55) 4
*
*
Nicollet County Urban *** 10.6 (6.8, 16.0) 38 (3, 55) 5
*
*
Pine County Rural *** 14.1 (9.7, 20.2) 9 (1, 52) 7
*
*
Redwood County Rural *** 16.7 (9.8, 27.1) 3 (1, 55) 3
*
*
Renville County Rural *** 14.7 (8.5, 24.4) 6 (1, 55) 3
*
*
Wadena County Rural *** 13.4 (7.6, 22.9) 12 (1, 55) 3
*
*
Big Stone County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Chippewa County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Clearwater County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Cook County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Cottonwood County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Dodge County Urban ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Faribault County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Grant County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Jackson County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Kittson County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Lac qui Parle County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Lake County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Lake of the Woods County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Lincoln County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Mahnomen County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Marshall County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Murray County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Nobles County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Norman County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Pennington County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Pipestone County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Pope County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Red Lake County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Rock County Urban ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Roseau County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Stevens County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Swift County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Traverse County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Waseca County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Watonwan County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Wilkin County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Yellow Medicine County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*

Notes:
Created by statecancerprofiles.cancer.gov on 03/20/2026 6:25 am.

State Cancer Registries may provide more current or more local data.

Trend
Rising when 95% confidence interval of average annual percent change is above 0.
Stable when 95% confidence interval of average annual percent change includes 0.
Falling when 95% confidence interval of average annual percent change is below 0.


† Death data provided by the National Vital Statistics System public use data file. Death rates calculated by the National Cancer Institute using SEER*Stat. Death rates are age-adjusted to the 2000 US standard population (20 age groups: <1, 1-4, 5-9, ... , 80-84, 85-89, 90+).

The Healthy People 2030 goals are based on rates adjusted using different methods but the differences should be minimal.

Population counts for denominators are based on Census populations as modified by NCI.

The US Population Data File is used with mortality data.

‡ The Average Annual Percent Change (AAPC) is based on the APCs calculated by Joinpoint. Due to data availability issues, the time period used in the calculation of the joinpoint regression model may differ for selected counties.

⋔ Results presented with the CI*Rank statistics help show the usefulness of ranks. For example, ranks for relatively rare diseases or less populated areas may be essentially meaningless because of their large variability, but ranks for more common diseases in densely populated regions can be very useful. More information about methodology can be found on the CI*Rank website.

When displaying county information, the CI*Rank for the state is not shown because it's not comparable. To see the state CI*Rank please view the statistics at the US By State level.

*** No Healthy People 2030 Objective for this cancer.

Healthy People 2030 Objectives provided by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Φ Rural–urban county classifications are based on the 2023 USDA Rural–Urban Continuum Codes (except for Connecticut Counties which use 2013 codes). State-level cancer rates for rural areas are calculated using cancer cases registered exclusively in rural counties, while state-level cancer rates for urban areas are calculated using cases registered exclusively in urban counties.

* Data has been suppressed to ensure confidentiality and stability of rate estimates. Counts are suppressed if fewer than 16 records 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).

Data for United States does not include Puerto Rico.

Return to Top