Return to Home Mortality > Table

Death Rates Table

Data Options

Death Rate Report by State

Colon & Rectum, 2022

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

Sorted by Rate

State
 sort alphabetically by name ascending
Met Healthy People Objective of 8.9?
Age-Adjusted Death Rate
deaths per 100,000
(95% Confidence Interval)
 sort by rate ascending
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
United States No 12.6 (12.5, 12.7) N/A 52,967 falling falling trend -1.2 (-1.7, -0.8)
Wyoming No 17.3 (14.3, 20.8) 1 (1, 25) 121 rising rising trend 7.2 (0.3, 14.3)
Mississippi No 16.8 (15.5, 18.2) 2 (1, 10) 630 falling falling trend -1.1 (-1.6, -0.9)
Arkansas No 16.2 (14.9, 17.5) 3 (1, 13) 626 falling falling trend -1.4 (-1.6, -1.2)
Oklahoma No 16.1 (15.0, 17.3) 4 (1, 13) 771 falling falling trend -1.1 (-1.2, -0.9)
West Virginia No 16.1 (14.6, 17.8) 5 (1, 18) 413 falling falling trend -1.5 (-1.8, -1.2)
Kentucky No 15.7 (14.6, 16.8) 6 (1, 15) 883 stable stable trend -0.8 (-1.5, 1.2)
Tennessee No 15.0 (14.2, 15.9) 7 (3, 18) 1,313 falling falling trend -1.7 (-1.8, -1.5)
Missouri No 14.9 (14.0, 15.8) 8 (3, 20) 1,193 stable stable trend 1.6 (-1.7, 3.4)
Alabama No 14.8 (13.9, 15.8) 9 (3, 21) 972 falling falling trend -1.8 (-3.4, -1.4)
Indiana No 14.6 (13.8, 15.5) 10 (4, 21) 1,226 falling falling trend -1.1 (-1.5, -0.4)
South Carolina No 14.3 (13.4, 15.3) 11 (5, 25) 1,003 stable stable trend 1.3 (-1.6, 3.2)
Louisiana No 14.3 (13.3, 15.3) 12 (4, 27) 806 falling falling trend -2.2 (-2.6, -2.0)
Nebraska No 14.2 (12.7, 15.9) 13 (2, 35) 342 stable stable trend 0.4 (-2.1, 3.4)
Kansas No 14.0 (12.8, 15.4) 14 (4, 32) 509 falling falling trend -1.7 (-1.9, -1.5)
Iowa No 14.0 (12.9, 15.2) 15 (4, 31) 579 falling falling trend -2.2 (-2.4, -2.1)
Texas No 13.8 (13.4, 14.3) 16 (10, 23) 4,265 stable stable trend -0.4 (-0.8, 0.1)
Georgia No 13.8 (13.2, 14.5) 17 (8, 26) 1,705 falling falling trend -1.7 (-3.5, -1.4)
Vermont No 13.4 (11.1, 16.1) 18 (1, 49) 127 falling falling trend -2.4 (-2.9, -2.0)
Nevada No 13.2 (12.1, 14.5) 19 (7, 38) 512 falling falling trend -1.8 (-2.1, -1.5)
Ohio No 13.2 (12.7, 13.8) 20 (13, 32) 2,050 falling falling trend -2.0 (-2.3, -0.9)
Delaware No 13.2 (11.3, 15.3) 21 (4, 48) 190 falling falling trend -2.8 (-3.2, -2.5)
Michigan No 13.1 (12.4, 13.7) 22 (13, 34) 1,732 stable stable trend -0.3 (-1.3, 1.4)
Virginia No 12.9 (12.3, 13.6) 23 (14, 36) 1,387 falling falling trend -1.2 (-1.7, -0.5)
Illinois No 12.9 (12.3, 13.5) 24 (16, 35) 2,066 falling falling trend -1.9 (-2.5, -0.4)
Alaska No 12.8 (10.2, 15.8) 25 (1, 51) 94 falling falling trend -2.1 (-2.5, -1.5)
North Carolina No 12.7 (12.1, 13.4) 26 (16, 37) 1,694 falling falling trend -1.4 (-1.9, -0.2)
Pennsylvania No 12.6 (12.0, 13.1) 27 (19, 38) 2,297 falling falling trend -2.5 (-2.6, -2.3)
Montana No 12.6 (10.8, 14.6) 28 (6, 49) 186 falling falling trend -2.1 (-2.4, -1.7)
Puerto Rico 8 No 12.6 (11.6, 13.6) N/A 670 stable stable trend -3.7 (-10.9, 4.0)
District of Columbia No 12.4 (9.8, 15.5) 29 (2, 51) 80 falling falling trend -2.7 (-3.1, -2.3)
Washington No 12.4 (11.6, 13.1) 30 (18, 42) 1,150 stable stable trend -0.5 (-1.5, 1.6)
South Dakota No 12.3 (10.3, 14.6) 31 (6, 51) 141 falling falling trend -2.0 (-2.4, -1.7)
Arizona No 12.3 (11.6, 13.0) 32 (19, 42) 1,182 falling falling trend -0.8 (-1.2, -0.1)
Hawaii 8 No 12.2 (10.7, 13.9) 33 (10, 49) 252 falling falling trend -1.7 (-2.1, -1.3)
Oregon No 12.1 (11.2, 13.1) 34 (18, 46) 672 falling falling trend -2.0 (-2.2, -1.8)
New Mexico No 12.0 (10.7, 13.4) 35 (14, 49) 334 falling falling trend -1.8 (-3.8, -1.5)
California No 11.8 (11.5, 12.2) 36 (29, 42) 5,479 falling falling trend -1.1 (-1.7, -0.3)
Idaho No 11.8 (10.4, 13.4) 37 (14, 50) 270 falling falling trend -1.7 (-2.0, -1.4)
Maryland No 11.8 (11.0, 12.6) 38 (22, 46) 929 falling falling trend -1.6 (-2.2, -0.8)
Florida No 11.7 (11.3, 12.1) 39 (29, 44) 3,947 falling falling trend -1.7 (-2.4, -0.5)
Maine No 11.7 (10.2, 13.3) 40 (13, 50) 248 stable stable trend -0.8 (-2.6, 3.0)
Wisconsin No 11.5 (10.7, 12.3) 41 (26, 48) 883 falling falling trend -2.1 (-2.5, -1.6)
Colorado No 11.0 (10.2, 11.8) 42 (31, 50) 722 stable stable trend -1.2 (-1.7, 0.0)
New Jersey No 10.9 (10.4, 11.6) 43 (34, 49) 1,321 falling falling trend -3.3 (-4.5, -3.1)
Utah No 10.8 (9.7, 12.1) 44 (27, 51) 318 falling falling trend -2.0 (-2.3, -1.6)
Minnesota No 10.8 (10.0, 11.6) 45 (33, 50) 784 falling falling trend -2.4 (-2.6, -2.2)
North Dakota No 10.7 (8.7, 13.0) 46 (13, 51) 104 falling falling trend -2.4 (-2.8, -2.1)
New York No 10.5 (10.1, 10.9) 47 (40, 50) 2,747 falling falling trend -3.0 (-3.2, -2.7)
New Hampshire No 10.4 (9.0, 11.9) 48 (27, 51) 213 falling falling trend -3.1 (-3.4, -2.8)
Rhode Island No 10.3 (8.7, 12.1) 49 (23, 51) 154 falling falling trend -3.3 (-3.5, -3.0)
Connecticut No 10.1 (9.2, 11.0) 50 (39, 51) 489 falling falling trend -1.5 (-2.5, -0.1)
Massachusetts No 9.3 (8.7, 10.0) 51 (47, 51) 856 falling falling trend -3.1 (-3.6, -1.6)
Notes:
Created by statecancerprofiles.cancer.gov on 12/09/2024 5:03 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.

⋔ 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.

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

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

Return to Top