Return to Home Mortality > Table

Death Rates Table

Data Options

Death Rate Report by State

Leukemia, 2018-2022

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

Sorted by Name

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 descending
Recent Trend
Recent 5-Year Trend in Death Rates
(95% Confidence Interval)
 sort by trend descending
United States *** 5.9 (5.8, 5.9) N/A 23,472 falling falling trend -1.9 (-2.1, -1.7)
Wyoming *** 6.5 (5.7, 7.4) 8 (1, 48) 45 falling falling trend -0.9 (-1.6, -0.1)
Wisconsin *** 6.5 (6.3, 6.8) 7 (3, 23) 493 falling falling trend -2.1 (-4.2, -1.4)
West Virginia *** 7.1 (6.6, 7.6) 1 (1, 12) 180 falling falling trend -0.6 (-0.9, -0.3)
Washington *** 5.8 (5.6, 6.0) 32 (19, 44) 509 falling falling trend -1.8 (-2.6, -1.4)
Virginia *** 6.0 (5.7, 6.2) 28 (14, 40) 602 falling falling trend -1.0 (-1.2, -0.8)
Vermont *** 5.5 (4.8, 6.2) 42 (7, 51) 51 falling falling trend -1.3 (-2.0, -0.7)
Utah *** 6.3 (5.8, 6.7) 16 (3, 39) 173 stable stable trend -0.6 (-1.1, 0.0)
Texas *** 5.7 (5.5, 5.8) 39 (29, 43) 1,599 falling falling trend -2.3 (-3.9, -1.6)
Tennessee *** 6.2 (6.0, 6.5) 17 (7, 32) 512 falling falling trend -2.1 (-5.8, -1.0)
South Dakota *** 6.9 (6.2, 7.6) 4 (1, 32) 76 falling falling trend -0.7 (-1.2, -0.1)
South Carolina *** 6.0 (5.7, 6.3) 26 (10, 40) 388 falling falling trend -1.0 (-3.2, -0.7)
Rhode Island *** 5.8 (5.3, 6.4) 31 (5, 49) 84 falling falling trend -0.7 (-1.2, -0.2)
Puerto Rico 8 *** 4.0 (3.7, 4.3) N/A 199 stable stable trend -0.9 (-8.0, 6.6)
Pennsylvania *** 6.1 (6.0, 6.3) 23 (11, 32) 1,094 falling falling trend -2.0 (-3.1, -1.5)
Oregon *** 6.2 (5.9, 6.5) 20 (6, 37) 331 falling falling trend -1.1 (-1.3, -0.8)
Oklahoma *** 6.8 (6.5, 7.2) 5 (1, 16) 316 falling falling trend -5.5 (-10.4, -0.8)
Ohio *** 6.3 (6.1, 6.5) 12 (6, 25) 953 falling falling trend -0.9 (-1.1, -0.8)
North Dakota *** 6.3 (5.6, 7.1) 13 (1, 47) 59 falling falling trend -1.1 (-1.7, -0.5)
North Carolina *** 6.0 (5.8, 6.2) 25 (13, 36) 754 falling falling trend -1.2 (-3.4, -0.9)
New York *** 5.2 (5.1, 5.3) 48 (43, 50) 1,317 falling falling trend -3.1 (-4.0, -2.5)
New Mexico *** 4.9 (4.5, 5.3) 50 (42, 51) 129 falling falling trend -1.5 (-1.9, -1.2)
New Jersey *** 5.3 (5.1, 5.5) 47 (38, 50) 612 falling falling trend -1.7 (-2.0, -1.5)
New Hampshire *** 5.4 (4.9, 5.9) 45 (19, 50) 101 falling falling trend -1.2 (-1.6, -0.9)
Nevada *** 5.5 (5.2, 5.9) 41 (22, 49) 192 falling falling trend -1.3 (-1.8, -0.8)
Nebraska *** 6.2 (5.8, 6.7) 18 (3, 42) 146 falling falling trend -0.7 (-1.1, -0.2)
Montana *** 5.4 (4.9, 6.0) 44 (14, 50) 80 falling falling trend -2.6 (-7.4, -1.7)
Missouri *** 6.3 (6.0, 6.6) 14 (5, 29) 491 falling falling trend -1.6 (-3.1, -1.1)
Mississippi *** 6.7 (6.3, 7.1) 6 (1, 21) 237 falling falling trend -0.6 (-0.9, -0.2)
Minnesota *** 6.5 (6.2, 6.8) 9 (3, 25) 452 falling falling trend -1.1 (-1.4, -0.8)
Michigan *** 6.4 (6.2, 6.6) 11 (5, 23) 825 falling falling trend -1.5 (-3.3, -1.0)
Massachusetts *** 5.4 (5.2, 5.6) 46 (35, 49) 479 falling falling trend -2.8 (-6.4, -1.4)
Maryland *** 5.5 (5.3, 5.8) 40 (29, 48) 405 falling falling trend -1.6 (-2.2, -1.3)
Maine *** 5.9 (5.4, 6.4) 30 (6, 48) 120 falling falling trend -1.0 (-1.5, -0.4)
Louisiana *** 6.1 (5.8, 6.4) 21 (6, 39) 327 falling falling trend -1.1 (-1.4, -0.9)
Kentucky *** 7.0 (6.6, 7.3) 2 (1, 11) 376 falling falling trend -0.4 (-0.7, -0.2)
Kansas *** 6.9 (6.5, 7.3) 3 (1, 16) 243 falling falling trend -0.6 (-0.8, -0.3)
Iowa *** 6.2 (5.8, 6.5) 19 (6, 38) 260 falling falling trend -1.4 (-2.2, -1.1)
Indiana *** 6.5 (6.2, 6.7) 10 (3, 23) 517 falling falling trend -2.0 (-3.6, -1.3)
Illinois *** 6.0 (5.8, 6.2) 27 (15, 37) 918 falling falling trend -2.5 (-4.2, -1.7)
Idaho *** 6.3 (5.8, 6.8) 15 (2, 41) 133 falling falling trend -1.0 (-1.4, -0.6)
Hawaii 8 *** 4.4 (3.9, 4.8) 51 (48, 51) 87 falling falling trend -0.9 (-1.3, -0.5)
Georgia *** 5.7 (5.5, 5.9) 38 (25, 45) 636 falling falling trend -1.2 (-1.4, -1.0)
Florida *** 5.8 (5.7, 5.9) 34 (25, 41) 1,880 falling falling trend -1.2 (-1.5, -1.1)
District of Columbia *** 4.9 (4.2, 5.7) 49 (19, 51) 32 falling falling trend -1.6 (-2.2, -1.0)
Delaware *** 6.1 (5.5, 6.8) 22 (2, 47) 82 falling falling trend -1.1 (-1.5, -0.7)
Connecticut *** 5.8 (5.5, 6.1) 33 (14, 46) 271 falling falling trend -1.0 (-1.3, -0.7)
Colorado *** 5.7 (5.5, 6.0) 36 (19, 46) 350 falling falling trend -1.2 (-1.4, -0.9)
California *** 5.5 (5.4, 5.6) 43 (37, 47) 2,393 falling falling trend -2.2 (-3.0, -1.8)
Arkansas *** 6.1 (5.7, 6.5) 24 (6, 40) 228 falling falling trend -2.9 (-7.3, -1.3)
Arizona *** 5.7 (5.5, 6.0) 35 (21, 45) 525 falling falling trend -0.9 (-1.2, -0.6)
Alaska *** 5.7 (4.9, 6.6) 37 (2, 51) 36 falling falling trend -1.5 (-2.7, -0.7)
Alabama *** 5.9 (5.7, 6.2) 29 (13, 42) 369 falling falling trend -2.8 (-6.6, -1.4)
Notes:
Created by statecancerprofiles.cancer.gov on 11/09/2024 10:41 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.

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