Return to Home Mortality > Table

Death Rates Table

Data Options

Death Rate Report by State

Esophagus, 2016-2020

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

Sorted by Count
State
 sort alphabetically by name ascending
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 ascending
Recent Trend
Recent 5-Year Trend in Death Rates
(95% Confidence Interval)
 sort by trend descending
United States *** 3.8 (3.8, 3.8) N/A 15,567 falling falling trend -1.2 (-1.3, -1.1)
California *** 3.0 (2.9, 3.1) 49 (47, 50) 1,342 falling falling trend -1.5 (-1.7, -1.3)
Florida *** 3.5 (3.4, 3.6) 40 (35, 45) 1,127 falling falling trend -2.0 (-2.6, -1.4)
Texas *** 3.2 (3.1, 3.3) 47 (43, 48) 935 falling falling trend -1.1 (-1.4, -0.8)
New York *** 3.3 (3.2, 3.4) 44 (39, 48) 848 falling falling trend -2.4 (-2.9, -1.9)
Pennsylvania *** 4.4 (4.3, 4.6) 14 (8, 22) 798 falling falling trend -1.1 (-1.4, -0.8)
Ohio *** 4.9 (4.7, 5.0) 5 (3, 11) 750 stable stable trend -0.6 (-1.2, 0.0)
Illinois *** 4.0 (3.9, 4.2) 27 (19, 33) 639 falling falling trend -1.3 (-1.8, -0.7)
Michigan *** 4.7 (4.5, 4.8) 8 (4, 17) 624 stable stable trend -0.4 (-0.9, 0.0)
North Carolina *** 3.4 (3.2, 3.5) 43 (37, 48) 442 falling falling trend -0.8 (-1.1, -0.5)
Georgia *** 3.4 (3.3, 3.6) 42 (35, 48) 405 falling falling trend -1.6 (-1.9, -1.3)
Indiana *** 4.8 (4.6, 5.0) 6 (3, 15) 400 rising rising trend 0.5 (0.3, 0.8)
New Jersey *** 3.3 (3.2, 3.5) 45 (37, 48) 383 falling falling trend -2.6 (-3.8, -1.4)
Massachusetts *** 4.3 (4.1, 4.5) 21 (10, 29) 382 falling falling trend -1.7 (-2.2, -1.1)
Virginia *** 3.6 (3.5, 3.8) 36 (29, 43) 380 falling falling trend -1.0 (-1.2, -0.8)
Washington *** 4.1 (3.9, 4.3) 25 (14, 32) 373 falling falling trend -1.7 (-2.6, -0.7)
Tennessee *** 4.1 (3.9, 4.3) 23 (14, 32) 360 stable stable trend 0.3 (0.0, 0.5)
Missouri *** 4.4 (4.2, 4.6) 18 (7, 26) 351 stable stable trend 0.0 (-0.5, 0.5)
Wisconsin *** 4.5 (4.3, 4.8) 12 (5, 23) 347 falling falling trend -0.8 (-1.3, -0.3)
Arizona *** 3.5 (3.3, 3.6) 41 (33, 47) 325 falling falling trend -3.0 (-4.6, -1.4)
Minnesota *** 4.1 (3.9, 4.4) 22 (12, 32) 291 stable stable trend -0.6 (-1.2, 0.0)
Maryland *** 3.6 (3.4, 3.8) 37 (28, 45) 270 falling falling trend -1.6 (-1.8, -1.4)
South Carolina *** 3.9 (3.7, 4.1) 31 (20, 38) 266 falling falling trend -1.7 (-2.2, -1.2)
Kentucky *** 4.6 (4.3, 4.8) 10 (4, 23) 260 rising rising trend 0.4 (0.1, 0.7)
Oregon *** 4.4 (4.2, 4.7) 15 (6, 27) 244 falling falling trend -0.9 (-1.3, -0.4)
Alabama *** 3.8 (3.6, 4.0) 34 (24, 41) 242 stable stable trend -0.1 (-0.4, 0.2)
Colorado *** 3.5 (3.3, 3.8) 38 (30, 47) 225 falling falling trend -1.7 (-2.9, -0.5)
Louisiana *** 3.8 (3.5, 4.0) 35 (23, 43) 215 falling falling trend -2.7 (-4.5, -0.8)
Oklahoma *** 4.1 (3.9, 4.4) 24 (12, 34) 200 stable stable trend -1.1 (-2.4, 0.2)
Iowa *** 4.5 (4.3, 4.9) 11 (3, 25) 190 stable stable trend -0.2 (-0.9, 0.6)
Connecticut *** 3.8 (3.5, 4.0) 32 (22, 43) 186 falling falling trend -0.8 (-1.1, -0.4)
Kansas *** 4.4 (4.1, 4.7) 16 (5, 30) 159 rising rising trend 1.0 (0.6, 1.4)
Nevada *** 4.0 (3.7, 4.3) 28 (15, 38) 151 falling falling trend -2.0 (-3.6, -0.4)
Arkansas *** 3.8 (3.5, 4.1) 33 (21, 44) 149 rising rising trend 0.7 (0.3, 1.2)
West Virginia *** 5.5 (5.1, 5.9) 2 (1, 6) 148 rising rising trend 1.4 (1.0, 1.8)
Mississippi *** 3.5 (3.3, 3.8) 39 (28, 48) 133 falling falling trend -1.5 (-2.8, -0.3)
Maine *** 5.5 (5.1, 6.0) 1 (1, 6) 113 stable stable trend 0.4 (-0.2, 1.1)
Nebraska *** 4.6 (4.2, 5.0) 9 (3, 28) 108 rising rising trend 0.6 (0.2, 1.1)
Puerto Rico 8 *** 2.0 (1.9, 2.2) N/A 101 falling falling trend -3.8 (-7.1, -0.4)
New Hampshire *** 5.0 (4.5, 5.4) 4 (1, 21) 95 falling falling trend -1.8 (-3.3, -0.3)
Idaho *** 4.5 (4.1, 4.9) 13 (3, 31) 94 stable stable trend 0.1 (-0.7, 0.8)
New Mexico *** 3.3 (3.0, 3.7) 46 (32, 50) 94 stable stable trend -0.1 (-0.7, 0.5)
Utah *** 2.7 (2.4, 3.0) 50 (47, 51) 76 stable stable trend -1.4 (-2.7, 0.1)
Montana *** 4.3 (3.8, 4.8) 20 (4, 38) 63 stable stable trend 0.4 (-0.4, 1.1)
Rhode Island *** 3.9 (3.5, 4.4) 30 (8, 46) 56 stable stable trend -0.6 (-1.2, 0.1)
Delaware *** 4.0 (3.5, 4.5) 29 (8, 46) 53 falling falling trend -1.6 (-2.4, -0.8)
Hawaii 8 *** 2.6 (2.3, 3.0) 51 (47, 51) 52 falling falling trend -0.8 (-1.4, -0.1)
South Dakota *** 4.4 (3.8, 5.0) 17 (3, 39) 50 rising rising trend 0.9 (0.3, 1.6)
Vermont *** 5.2 (4.5, 5.9) 3 (1, 24) 48 stable stable trend 0.6 (0.0, 1.1)
North Dakota *** 4.4 (3.8, 5.0) 19 (3, 41) 40 rising rising trend 1.3 (0.6, 2.0)
Alaska *** 4.8 (4.0, 5.6) 7 (1, 35) 34 stable stable trend -0.2 (-1.3, 0.9)
Wyoming *** 4.1 (3.4, 4.8) 26 (3, 48) 30 stable stable trend 11.6 (-9.4, 37.5)
District of Columbia *** 3.0 (2.5, 3.7) 48 (28, 51) 21 falling falling trend -4.7 (-5.3, -4.1)
Notes:
Created by statecancerprofiles.cancer.gov on 11/27/2022 3:25 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 (19 age groups: <1, 1-4, 5-9, ... , 80-84, 85+). 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.
8 Due to data availability issues, the time period used in the calculation of the joinpoint regression model may differ for selected counties.



Please note that the data comes 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 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.

Data for United States does not include Puerto Rico.
CI*Rank data for Puerto Rico is not available.

Return to Top