Return to Home Mortality > Table

Death Rates Table

Data Options
Comparison Options

Death Rate Report for Kansas by County

All Cancer Sites, 2019-2023

All Races (includes Hispanic), Both Sexes, Ages 65+

Sorted by Count

County
 sort alphabetically by name ascending
2023 Rural-Urban Continuum Codes Φ
 sort by rural urban descending
Met Healthy People Objective of 122.7?
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
Kansas N/A No 882.1 (869.9, 894.4) N/A 4,099 falling falling trend -0.9 (-1.1, -0.8)
United States N/A No 846.2 (845.1, 847.3) N/A 447,280 falling falling trend -1.4 (-1.7, -1.3)
Hamilton County Rural No 1,126.1 (638.7, 1,842.8) 10 (1, 100) 3 stable stable trend 1.0 (-2.3, 3.9)
Hodgeman County Rural No 1,014.4 (593.9, 1,608.8) 24 (1, 100) 3
*
*
Lane County Rural No 997.0 (588.9, 1,575.1) 28 (1, 100) 3 stable stable trend 0.9 (-1.7, 3.5)
Haskell County Rural No 714.2 (432.6, 1,106.6) 95 (5, 100) 4 stable stable trend -1.5 (-3.8, 0.8)
Logan County Rural No 747.3 (452.9, 1,158.2) 92 (4, 100) 4 stable stable trend 0.5 (-2.9, 3.9)
Sheridan County Rural No 636.7 (381.7, 997.0) 100 (11, 100) 4 stable stable trend -1.7 (-4.7, 0.9)
Cheyenne County Rural No 643.3 (393.0, 988.2) 99 (10, 100) 4 stable stable trend -1.6 (-5.5, 1.5)
Kiowa County Rural No 870.8 (542.0, 1,320.4) 66 (2, 100) 4 stable stable trend 2.3 (-1.1, 5.6)
Lincoln County Rural No 648.6 (404.3, 982.4) 98 (15, 100) 4 falling falling trend -2.2 (-4.5, -0.4)
Comanche County Rural No 1,180.6 (754.2, 1,757.6) 6 (1, 100) 4 stable stable trend 0.3 (-3.3, 3.7)
Graham County Rural No 672.9 (432.8, 1,001.3) 96 (9, 100) 5 stable stable trend -1.9 (-4.9, 0.7)
Kearny County Rural No 882.7 (584.1, 1,279.2) 57 (2, 100) 5 stable stable trend -0.7 (-3.8, 2.7)
Chase County Rural No 986.0 (659.2, 1,416.5) 29 (2, 100) 5
*
*
Ness County Rural No 855.5 (567.2, 1,237.4) 69 (2, 100) 5 stable stable trend 0.2 (-2.1, 2.4)
Rawlins County Rural No 844.2 (562.8, 1,214.5) 73 (3, 100) 5 stable stable trend -0.5 (-3.1, 1.8)
Decatur County Rural No 792.6 (530.7, 1,135.6) 82 (4, 100) 6 stable stable trend 0.6 (-2.7, 3.8)
Stafford County Rural No 726.7 (490.7, 1,034.3) 94 (8, 100) 6 stable stable trend -1.8 (-4.5, 0.5)
Stevens County Rural No 764.1 (514.0, 1,090.2) 90 (5, 100) 6 stable stable trend -0.9 (-4.2, 2.2)
Woodson County Rural No 825.2 (558.4, 1,175.3) 77 (3, 100) 6 falling falling trend -29.5 (-46.2, -3.0)
Gove County Rural No 1,065.7 (732.6, 1,494.4) 16 (1, 100) 6 stable stable trend 1.6 (-1.3, 4.8)
Rush County Rural No 924.6 (635.0, 1,298.7) 41 (2, 100) 6 stable stable trend -1.0 (-3.2, 0.9)
Edwards County Rural No 1,129.7 (782.0, 1,579.2) 9 (1, 98) 7 stable stable trend 0.5 (-1.9, 2.8)
Morton County Rural No 1,372.7 (958.0, 1,901.2) 2 (1, 95) 7 stable stable trend 1.7 (-1.3, 5.1)
Scott County Rural No 727.7 (507.1, 1,010.9) 93 (12, 100) 7 stable stable trend -2.2 (-5.0, 0.5)
Chautauqua County Rural No 873.7 (614.3, 1,205.1) 64 (3, 100) 7 stable stable trend -1.4 (-4.1, 0.9)
Jewell County Rural No 921.9 (653.5, 1,261.1) 46 (3, 100) 7 stable stable trend 0.1 (-1.6, 1.8)
Gray County Rural No 852.4 (605.6, 1,165.4) 70 (4, 100) 8 stable stable trend -1.4 (-3.5, 0.6)
Elk County Rural No 1,295.5 (928.1, 1,758.6) 4 (1, 94) 8 stable stable trend -0.3 (-2.9, 2.0)
Norton County Rural No 756.7 (539.4, 1,030.1) 91 (9, 100) 8 stable stable trend -1.4 (-3.9, 0.8)
Smith County Rural No 810.2 (575.6, 1,105.8) 80 (6, 100) 8 stable stable trend -0.8 (-3.1, 1.2)
Grant County Rural No 878.4 (632.1, 1,189.4) 61 (3, 100) 8 stable stable trend -0.8 (-3.7, 2.0)
Osborne County Rural No 899.8 (645.8, 1,220.1) 52 (3, 100) 8 stable stable trend -0.5 (-3.3, 2.1)
Trego County Rural No 1,312.9 (951.7, 1,764.2) 3 (1, 90) 9 stable stable trend 1.8 (-0.1, 3.8)
Barber County Rural No 977.4 (711.8, 1,309.3) 32 (2, 99) 9 falling falling trend -1.8 (-3.6, -0.3)
Pawnee County Rural No 670.2 (487.5, 897.2) 97 (28, 100) 9 stable stable trend -1.7 (-3.7, 0.1)
Meade County Rural No 1,281.0 (934.3, 1,712.3) 5 (1, 89) 9 stable stable trend 1.7 (-0.5, 3.9)
Sherman County Rural No 792.1 (580.1, 1,055.6) 83 (7, 100) 9 stable stable trend -0.9 (-3.8, 1.8)
Ottawa County Rural No 887.7 (659.3, 1,170.0) 54 (4, 99) 10 stable stable trend -1.7 (-4.1, 0.5)
Rooks County Rural No 901.5 (668.8, 1,188.8) 51 (3, 100) 10 stable stable trend -0.5 (-1.8, 0.8)
Washington County Rural No 834.2 (627.7, 1,086.4) 76 (7, 100) 11 stable stable trend 0.1 (-1.9, 2.1)
Mitchell County Rural No 905.4 (684.4, 1,174.6) 49 (4, 99) 11 stable stable trend 0.9 (-0.5, 6.2)
Phillips County Rural No 964.6 (728.4, 1,252.8) 35 (3, 98) 11 stable stable trend -0.3 (-2.0, 1.4)
Ellsworth County Rural No 786.8 (592.4, 1,023.0) 85 (9, 100) 11 stable stable trend -0.2 (-2.9, 2.5)
Thomas County Rural No 845.7 (641.1, 1,093.9) 72 (7, 100) 11 stable stable trend -0.7 (-3.4, 2.1)
Harper County Rural No 1,132.0 (868.7, 1,448.5) 8 (2, 92) 12 stable stable trend 0.3 (-1.3, 1.8)
Wabaunsee County Urban No 948.3 (725.8, 1,216.4) 38 (4, 98) 12 stable stable trend -0.5 (-2.6, 1.6)
Republic County Rural No 1,089.7 (840.1, 1,388.7) 14 (2, 94) 13 stable stable trend 1.6 (-0.2, 3.5)
Greenwood County Rural No 984.3 (766.4, 1,244.6) 31 (3, 96) 14 stable stable trend -0.7 (-2.9, 1.4)
Morris County Rural No 1,025.6 (799.0, 1,296.1) 22 (2, 96) 14 stable stable trend -1.1 (-3.1, 0.8)
Coffey County Rural No 838.2 (655.9, 1,055.3) 75 (10, 100) 14 falling falling trend -2.4 (-4.0, -1.0)
Doniphan County Urban No 1,107.7 (870.2, 1,389.4) 12 (2, 89) 15 stable stable trend -0.1 (-2.1, 1.7)
Russell County Rural No 962.0 (759.8, 1,200.7) 36 (3, 96) 16 stable stable trend 0.2 (-1.6, 2.0)
Anderson County Rural No 1,020.3 (809.6, 1,269.1) 23 (3, 94) 16 stable stable trend -14.0 (-33.8, 2.7)
Clay County Rural No 873.9 (694.1, 1,085.5) 63 (8, 98) 16 stable stable trend -0.2 (-2.3, 1.8)
Rice County Rural No 984.5 (787.8, 1,215.1) 30 (3, 95) 17 stable stable trend -1.4 (-3.3, 0.4)
Linn County Urban No 878.7 (704.3, 1,083.1) 59 (7, 97) 17 falling falling trend -4.6 (-19.1, -1.2)
Pratt County Rural No 887.5 (707.3, 1,099.4) 55 (6, 98) 17 stable stable trend 0.2 (-2.1, 2.4)
Cloud County Rural No 957.5 (768.1, 1,179.1) 37 (4, 96) 18 stable stable trend 0.6 (-1.3, 2.4)
Wilson County Rural No 1,039.1 (839.9, 1,271.1) 18 (3, 90) 19 stable stable trend 0.9 (-0.8, 2.6)
Jackson County Urban No 773.2 (626.0, 944.7) 89 (23, 100) 19 falling falling trend -1.8 (-3.1, -0.6)
Seward County Rural No 924.0 (750.7, 1,125.0) 43 (6, 96) 20 stable stable trend -0.1 (-1.5, 1.2)
Brown County Rural No 1,099.7 (893.9, 1,338.2) 13 (2, 84) 20 stable stable trend 0.1 (-1.5, 1.7)
Marshall County Rural No 924.2 (753.5, 1,122.1) 42 (6, 95) 21 stable stable trend -0.3 (-1.8, 1.1)
Bourbon County Rural No 815.4 (670.2, 982.8) 78 (17, 99) 22 stable stable trend -0.3 (-1.7, 1.0)
Nemaha County Rural No 1,079.7 (887.9, 1,300.2) 15 (3, 84) 23 stable stable trend 1.2 (-0.1, 2.6)
Allen County Rural No 966.6 (802.0, 1,154.9) 34 (5, 92) 24 stable stable trend -0.8 (-2.3, 0.6)
Atchison County Rural No 880.1 (731.2, 1,050.2) 58 (11, 96) 24 falling falling trend -1.6 (-2.9, -0.4)
Marion County Rural No 923.3 (767.5, 1,100.9) 45 (8, 94) 25 stable stable trend 0.0 (-1.4, 1.3)
Kingman County Rural No 1,775.8 (1,477.2, 2,117.0) 1 (1, 6) 25 rising rising trend 10.8 (3.2, 33.1)
Osage County Urban No 877.6 (732.5, 1,043.0) 62 (11, 95) 26 falling falling trend -1.5 (-2.9, -0.2)
Geary County Urban No 906.3 (763.8, 1,067.7) 48 (10, 94) 28 falling falling trend -2.9 (-8.3, -1.4)
Pottawatomie County Urban No 814.3 (687.6, 957.4) 79 (21, 98) 30 falling falling trend -1.3 (-2.5, -0.1)
Neosho County Rural No 997.1 (844.2, 1,169.6) 27 (5, 87) 30 stable stable trend -0.6 (-1.8, 0.6)
Finney County Rural No 788.4 (669.9, 921.6) 84 (28, 98) 32 stable stable trend -0.6 (-1.8, 0.8)
Ford County Rural No 846.8 (718.8, 990.9) 71 (18, 96) 32 stable stable trend -0.7 (-2.0, 0.6)
Ellis County Rural No 784.5 (668.0, 915.3) 86 (31, 98) 33 stable stable trend -0.9 (-1.9, 0.0)
Jefferson County Urban No 1,029.7 (881.1, 1,196.3) 20 (5, 79) 35 stable stable trend 0.0 (-1.2, 1.2)
Cherokee County Urban No 1,030.3 (885.2, 1,192.5) 19 (4, 78) 37 stable stable trend -0.9 (-1.8, 0.0)
Dickinson County Rural No 1,001.4 (860.5, 1,158.3) 26 (5, 83) 37 stable stable trend 0.0 (-1.1, 1.2)
Sumner County Urban No 1,009.3 (876.2, 1,156.7) 25 (6, 77) 42 stable stable trend -0.8 (-1.7, 0.0)
Labette County Rural No 1,116.7 (972.0, 1,276.8) 11 (2, 57) 43 stable stable trend -0.6 (-2.1, 0.9)
Barton County Rural No 869.9 (756.7, 995.1) 67 (19, 93) 43 stable stable trend -0.8 (-2.3, 0.6)
Lyon County Rural No 905.0 (787.5, 1,035.1) 50 (14, 89) 43 stable stable trend 0.0 (-1.4, 1.4)
Franklin County Rural No 1,051.4 (916.7, 1,200.4) 17 (4, 73) 44 stable stable trend -0.3 (-1.5, 1.0)
Miami County Urban No 783.1 (683.9, 892.4) 87 (38, 97) 45 stable stable trend -1.0 (-2.4, 0.4)
McPherson County Rural No 807.5 (708.7, 916.0) 81 (35, 96) 51 stable stable trend -0.6 (-1.7, 0.5)
Montgomery County Rural No 928.2 (822.7, 1,043.4) 40 (13, 86) 56 falling falling trend -1.4 (-2.0, -0.8)
Harvey County Urban No 894.1 (795.7, 1,001.1) 53 (20, 90) 61 stable stable trend -1.0 (-2.1, 0.0)
Riley County Urban No 920.5 (818.9, 1,031.1) 47 (15, 86) 61 stable stable trend -0.1 (-1.0, 0.8)
Cowley County Rural No 1,026.4 (916.4, 1,146.0) 21 (7, 68) 64 stable stable trend -0.6 (-1.5, 0.3)
Crawford County Rural No 1,144.3 (1,024.1, 1,274.5) 7 (3, 42) 67 stable stable trend 0.1 (-1.3, 1.5)
Saline County Rural No 878.6 (797.4, 965.7) 60 (24, 88) 87 stable stable trend -0.6 (-1.6, 0.4)
Butler County Urban No 945.0 (860.8, 1,035.1) 39 (16, 76) 95 falling falling trend -0.8 (-1.5, -0.1)
Reno County Rural No 857.4 (784.9, 934.6) 68 (30, 88) 105 stable stable trend -0.6 (-1.4, 0.2)
Leavenworth County Urban No 923.4 (846.5, 1,005.4) 44 (19, 79) 109 falling falling trend -1.1 (-1.8, -0.2)
Douglas County Urban No 841.2 (774.3, 912.2) 74 (36, 90) 121 falling falling trend -1.1 (-1.7, -0.5)
Wyandotte County Urban No 972.1 (911.1, 1,036.1) 33 (16, 62) 198 falling falling trend -1.6 (-2.2, -1.0)
Shawnee County Urban No 870.8 (825.3, 918.1) 65 (38, 79) 280 falling falling trend -1.2 (-1.8, -0.6)
Sedgwick County Urban No 884.6 (854.5, 915.4) 56 (39, 73) 674 falling falling trend -1.2 (-1.5, -0.9)
Johnson County Urban No 779.0 (752.7, 805.9) 88 (67, 92) 684 falling falling trend -1.3 (-1.6, -1.0)
Clark County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Greeley County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Stanton County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Wallace County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Wichita County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*

Notes:
Created by statecancerprofiles.cancer.gov on 03/23/2026 7:40 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.

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