Return to Home Mortality > Table

Death Rates Table

Data Options

Death Rate Report for Illinois by County

All Cancer Sites, 2018-2022

All Races (includes Hispanic), Male, All Ages

Sorted by Name

County
 sort alphabetically by name descending
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
Illinois N/A No 177.2 (175.7, 178.6) N/A 12,221 falling falling trend -1.9 (-2.0, -1.8)
United States N/A No 173.2 (173.0, 173.5) N/A 317,428 falling falling trend -1.8 (-1.8, -1.8)
Adams County Rural No 191.1 (173.3, 210.5) 66 (23, 93) 88 falling falling trend -2.1 (-2.4, -1.7)
Alexander County Urban No 306.6 (233.3, 400.0) 1 (1, 66) 13 stable stable trend -0.5 (-1.8, 0.7)
Bond County Urban No 196.2 (158.8, 240.3) 52 (6, 101) 20 stable stable trend -1.1 (-2.2, 0.0)
Boone County Urban No 173.9 (153.0, 197.0) 89 (32, 102) 53 falling falling trend -1.8 (-2.3, -1.3)
Brown County Rural No 166.2 (110.0, 241.2) 94 (4, 102) 6 stable stable trend -0.9 (-2.7, 0.9)
Bureau County Rural No 192.5 (168.5, 219.4) 62 (16, 98) 48 falling falling trend -1.2 (-1.8, -0.6)
Calhoun County Urban No 242.5 (173.9, 334.4) 11 (1, 102) 9 stable stable trend -0.3 (-1.8, 1.2)
Carroll County Rural No 188.2 (154.8, 227.6) 72 (9, 102) 24 falling falling trend -1.4 (-2.2, -0.5)
Cass County Rural No 192.1 (149.1, 243.9) 64 (4, 102) 14 falling falling trend -1.3 (-2.3, -0.3)
Champaign County Urban No 159.0 (147.4, 171.4) 98 (76, 102) 145 falling falling trend -1.9 (-2.4, -1.3)
Christian County Rural No 200.1 (174.8, 228.3) 43 (11, 94) 47 falling falling trend -1.2 (-1.9, -0.5)
Clark County Rural No 201.9 (162.3, 248.8) 40 (5, 101) 20 stable stable trend -0.7 (-1.6, 0.3)
Clay County Rural No 201.6 (160.4, 251.0) 41 (4, 101) 17 falling falling trend -1.2 (-2.2, -0.3)
Clinton County Urban No 170.3 (146.8, 196.7) 91 (32, 102) 39 falling falling trend -2.6 (-5.9, -1.7)
Coles County Rural No 192.6 (169.5, 218.1) 61 (15, 96) 53 falling falling trend -1.2 (-1.9, -0.4)
Cook County Urban No 167.1 (164.8, 169.4) 92 (80, 95) 4,350 falling falling trend -3.1 (-4.3, -2.5)
Crawford County Rural No 220.5 (183.7, 263.0) 26 (2, 93) 27 stable stable trend -0.5 (-1.3, 0.3)
Cumberland County Rural No 187.1 (143.5, 241.0) 74 (5, 102) 13 falling falling trend -1.3 (-2.5, -0.1)
De Witt County Rural No 206.4 (166.9, 252.9) 33 (3, 100) 20 falling falling trend -1.7 (-2.4, -1.0)
DeKalb County Urban No 193.8 (175.6, 213.4) 56 (20, 93) 88 falling falling trend -1.1 (-1.4, -0.7)
Douglas County Rural No 194.0 (159.9, 233.6) 55 (8, 101) 23 falling falling trend -1.3 (-2.1, -0.4)
DuPage County Urban No 146.2 (141.3, 151.2) 100 (94, 102) 724 falling falling trend -2.1 (-2.3, -1.9)
Edgar County Rural No 205.0 (170.9, 245.0) 37 (5, 100) 27 falling falling trend -1.4 (-2.2, -0.6)
Edwards County Rural No 277.9 (209.7, 363.7) 2 (1, 87) 12 stable stable trend -0.6 (-2.4, 1.1)
Effingham County Rural No 196.3 (169.7, 226.1) 49 (10, 98) 41 falling falling trend -1.0 (-1.6, -0.3)
Fayette County Rural No 185.3 (154.9, 220.2) 78 (13, 102) 27 falling falling trend -1.4 (-2.2, -0.6)
Ford County Urban No 260.8 (212.7, 317.1) 3 (1, 75) 22 stable stable trend -0.1 (-1.1, 0.9)
Franklin County Rural No 245.5 (218.6, 275.1) 10 (1, 50) 63 falling falling trend -1.3 (-1.8, -0.7)
Fulton County Rural No 250.6 (222.1, 282.1) 7 (1, 40) 58 stable stable trend -0.6 (-1.3, 0.2)
Gallatin County Rural No 213.3 (149.0, 300.1) 29 (1, 102) 8 falling falling trend -2.4 (-3.5, -1.4)
Greene County Rural No 206.5 (165.1, 256.4) 32 (2, 101) 18 stable stable trend -1.0 (-2.1, 0.0)
Grundy County Urban No 196.3 (171.8, 223.2) 50 (13, 97) 51 falling falling trend -1.5 (-2.2, -0.8)
Hamilton County Rural No 237.2 (181.9, 305.8) 14 (1, 99) 13 stable stable trend -0.6 (-1.5, 0.3)
Hancock County Rural No 144.6 (117.0, 177.9) 101 (55, 102) 20 falling falling trend -2.4 (-3.3, -1.7)
Hardin County Rural No 236.9 (167.3, 334.9) 15 (1, 102) 8 stable stable trend -0.6 (-2.2, 1.0)
Henderson County Rural No 143.9 (103.9, 199.4) 102 (23, 102) 9 falling falling trend -2.2 (-3.6, -0.9)
Henry County Urban No 178.6 (158.7, 200.5) 85 (31, 100) 61 falling falling trend -1.5 (-2.2, -0.8)
Iroquois County Rural No 221.9 (192.7, 254.8) 25 (3, 83) 44 stable stable trend -0.3 (-0.8, 0.2)
Jackson County Rural No 202.9 (179.4, 228.8) 39 (10, 91) 57 falling falling trend -1.1 (-1.7, -0.4)
Jasper County Rural No 216.0 (169.1, 273.8) 27 (1, 101) 15 stable stable trend -0.8 (-1.8, 0.2)
Jefferson County Rural No 233.1 (206.5, 262.5) 17 (2, 65) 58 falling falling trend -0.8 (-1.5, -0.1)
Jersey County Urban No 190.2 (159.6, 225.6) 69 (11, 101) 29 falling falling trend -1.2 (-2.1, -0.4)
Jo Daviess County Rural No 166.7 (141.4, 196.5) 93 (31, 102) 34 falling falling trend -1.3 (-2.1, -0.4)
Johnson County Rural No 189.5 (152.0, 234.3) 70 (6, 102) 18 falling falling trend -1.3 (-2.3, -0.3)
Kane County Urban No 159.4 (152.4, 166.7) 97 (82, 100) 409 falling falling trend -1.7 (-2.0, -1.5)
Kankakee County Urban No 194.1 (179.0, 210.3) 54 (25, 88) 127 falling falling trend -1.7 (-2.0, -1.4)
Kendall County Urban No 175.2 (158.1, 193.5) 87 (38, 99) 86 falling falling trend -1.4 (-1.9, -0.8)
Knox County Rural No 197.4 (177.0, 219.7) 47 (16, 91) 71 falling falling trend -1.2 (-1.8, -0.7)
La Salle County Rural No 222.0 (206.4, 238.5) 24 (9, 57) 160 falling falling trend -0.8 (-1.2, -0.4)
Lake County Urban No 159.6 (153.6, 165.8) 96 (84, 100) 575 falling falling trend -1.8 (-2.0, -1.6)
Lawrence County Rural No 255.0 (210.9, 306.0) 6 (1, 80) 24 stable stable trend -0.9 (-1.9, 0.1)
Lee County Rural No 185.5 (161.7, 212.2) 77 (19, 99) 46 falling falling trend -1.4 (-2.0, -0.8)
Livingston County Rural No 192.6 (167.8, 220.3) 60 (14, 98) 46 falling falling trend -1.3 (-2.1, -0.6)
Logan County Rural No 224.1 (193.4, 258.6) 21 (3, 82) 39 falling falling trend -0.8 (-1.4, -0.1)
Macon County Urban No 206.0 (190.5, 222.5) 34 (17, 77) 139 falling falling trend -1.7 (-3.6, -1.3)
Macoupin County Urban No 234.4 (210.1, 261.0) 16 (3, 56) 72 stable stable trend -0.5 (-1.0, 0.0)
Madison County Urban No 205.4 (195.1, 216.0) 36 (22, 68) 318 falling falling trend -1.2 (-1.5, -0.9)
Marion County Rural No 238.1 (211.2, 267.8) 13 (2, 56) 59 stable stable trend -0.6 (-1.2, 0.1)
Marshall County Urban No 199.9 (159.0, 249.5) 44 (3, 102) 18 stable stable trend -0.8 (-1.9, 0.3)
Mason County Rural No 258.4 (213.5, 311.2) 5 (1, 71) 25 stable stable trend -0.7 (-1.7, 0.4)
Massac County Urban No 205.9 (167.2, 252.0) 35 (3, 100) 21 falling falling trend -1.7 (-2.6, -0.9)
McDonough County Rural No 181.7 (152.3, 215.5) 81 (16, 102) 29 falling falling trend -1.2 (-1.7, -0.6)
McHenry County Urban No 178.9 (169.4, 188.9) 83 (51, 93) 291 stable stable trend -0.6 (-2.2, 2.5)
McLean County Urban No 186.5 (173.0, 200.7) 75 (34, 91) 149 falling falling trend -1.4 (-1.8, -0.9)
Menard County Urban No 191.2 (150.0, 241.2) 65 (5, 102) 16 falling falling trend -1.4 (-2.3, -0.4)
Mercer County Urban No 196.7 (162.3, 237.4) 48 (6, 101) 24 falling falling trend -1.0 (-1.9, -0.1)
Monroe County Urban No 153.3 (130.4, 179.3) 99 (52, 102) 34 falling falling trend -2.2 (-2.8, -1.5)
Montgomery County Rural No 222.1 (193.2, 254.5) 23 (3, 84) 44 falling falling trend -1.6 (-2.2, -1.0)
Morgan County Rural No 223.8 (196.1, 254.7) 22 (3, 81) 49 stable stable trend -0.5 (-1.2, 0.2)
Moultrie County Rural No 242.3 (198.0, 294.0) 12 (1, 90) 22 stable stable trend -0.5 (-1.4, 0.5)
Ogle County Rural No 183.0 (162.6, 205.5) 80 (27, 99) 62 falling falling trend -1.4 (-1.9, -0.9)
Peoria County Urban No 197.4 (185.3, 210.2) 46 (26, 81) 206 falling falling trend -1.5 (-1.7, -1.2)
Perry County Rural No 188.2 (156.2, 225.1) 71 (10, 102) 25 falling falling trend -1.4 (-2.2, -0.6)
Piatt County Urban No 181.5 (147.5, 221.9) 82 (10, 102) 21 falling falling trend -1.6 (-2.5, -0.8)
Pike County Rural No 249.4 (207.7, 297.8) 8 (1, 73) 27 stable stable trend -0.3 (-1.2, 0.6)
Pope County Rural No 184.5 (127.4, 272.4) 79 (1, 102) 8
*
*
Pulaski County Rural No 260.0 (195.1, 344.0) 4 (1, 95) 11 stable stable trend -0.9 (-2.4, 0.5)
Putnam County Rural No 172.8 (121.5, 242.8) 90 (4, 102) 8 falling falling trend -2.0 (-3.5, -0.6)
Randolph County Rural No 208.8 (181.2, 239.8) 31 (7, 94) 43 falling falling trend -1.0 (-1.6, -0.3)
Richland County Rural No 204.4 (167.1, 248.3) 38 (3, 100) 22 stable stable trend -0.9 (-1.8, 0.1)
Rock Island County Urban No 190.5 (177.8, 203.8) 68 (31, 88) 176 stable stable trend -0.8 (-1.4, 2.4)
Saline County Rural No 211.9 (180.5, 247.8) 30 (4, 94) 34 falling falling trend -1.5 (-2.3, -0.8)
Sangamon County Urban No 187.5 (176.1, 199.5) 73 (36, 89) 215 falling falling trend -1.9 (-5.3, -1.3)
Schuyler County Rural No 177.6 (129.5, 240.4) 86 (4, 102) 10 stable stable trend -1.1 (-2.5, 0.5)
Scott County Rural No 247.6 (173.2, 345.3) 9 (1, 102) 8 stable stable trend -0.3 (-1.5, 0.9)
Shelby County Rural No 225.2 (193.5, 261.5) 20 (3, 84) 38 stable stable trend -0.6 (-1.3, 0.1)
St. Clair County Urban No 192.7 (182.1, 203.8) 59 (33, 84) 266 falling falling trend -1.8 (-2.1, -1.6)
Stark County Urban No 213.5 (152.1, 294.7) 28 (1, 102) 9 stable stable trend -0.9 (-2.1, 0.3)
Stephenson County Rural No 201.1 (179.3, 225.1) 42 (13, 90) 66 falling falling trend -1.2 (-1.6, -0.8)
Tazewell County Urban No 193.6 (180.2, 207.7) 57 (27, 87) 162 falling falling trend -1.3 (-1.5, -1.0)
Union County Rural No 196.0 (162.6, 235.2) 53 (7, 101) 26 falling falling trend -1.1 (-2.0, -0.3)
Vermilion County Rural No 230.6 (211.7, 251.0) 18 (5, 47) 114 falling falling trend -0.9 (-1.4, -0.5)
Wabash County Rural No 192.4 (150.7, 243.1) 63 (5, 102) 16 falling falling trend -1.6 (-2.8, -0.5)
Warren County Rural No 226.8 (187.5, 272.4) 19 (2, 94) 25 falling falling trend -1.3 (-2.2, -0.4)
Washington County Rural No 165.4 (130.5, 207.7) 95 (17, 102) 17 falling falling trend -1.2 (-2.1, -0.3)
Wayne County Rural No 174.9 (142.6, 213.3) 88 (17, 102) 21 falling falling trend -1.7 (-2.7, -0.7)
White County Rural No 196.3 (159.9, 239.8) 51 (5, 102) 21 falling falling trend -1.5 (-2.5, -0.4)
Whiteside County Rural No 190.6 (171.6, 211.4) 67 (23, 94) 77 falling falling trend -0.8 (-1.2, -0.4)
Will County Urban No 186.0 (179.0, 193.1) 76 (47, 86) 605 falling falling trend -1.5 (-1.7, -1.2)
Williamson County Rural No 197.9 (179.2, 218.0) 45 (17, 90) 86 falling falling trend -1.6 (-2.1, -1.0)
Winnebago County Urban No 192.8 (183.3, 202.6) 58 (34, 82) 328 falling falling trend -1.4 (-4.0, -1.1)
Woodford County Urban No 178.6 (155.1, 204.8) 84 (24, 101) 44 falling falling trend -1.0 (-1.8, -0.2)
Notes:
Created by statecancerprofiles.cancer.gov on 12/11/2024 7:25 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.

⋔ 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.

Φ Rural-Urban Continuum Codes provided by the USDA.

* 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).

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.

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.

Return to Top