Return to Home Mortality > Table

Death Rates Table

Data Options

Death Rate Report for Indiana by County

All Cancer Sites, 2016-2020

All Races (includes Hispanic), Male, All Ages

Sorted by Rate
County
 sort alphabetically by name ascending
Met Healthy People Objective of 122.7?
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
Indiana No 201.3 (199.2, 203.5) N/A 7,168 falling falling trend -1.7 (-1.8, -1.6)
United States No 177.5 (177.2, 177.8) N/A 315,770 falling falling trend -2.2 (-2.5, -2.0)
Fountain County No 287.3 (244.4, 336.3) 1 (1, 33) 33 stable stable trend -0.8 (-1.6, 0.1)
Blackford County No 278.5 (228.7, 337.1) 2 (1, 57) 23 falling falling trend -0.9 (-1.7, -0.1)
Scott County No 269.8 (230.7, 313.8) 3 (1, 49) 37 falling falling trend -1.4 (-2.3, -0.4)
Jefferson County No 257.6 (224.6, 294.2) 4 (1, 55) 48 stable stable trend -0.4 (-1.2, 0.4)
Jennings County No 254.1 (219.1, 293.4) 5 (1, 63) 41 falling falling trend -1.0 (-1.9, -0.2)
Crawford County No 249.8 (197.1, 313.1) 6 (1, 88) 18 stable stable trend -0.1 (-1.2, 1.1)
Pulaski County No 245.6 (200.5, 298.7) 7 (1, 85) 22 stable stable trend -0.3 (-1.3, 0.7)
Greene County No 243.1 (213.8, 275.6) 8 (1, 62) 52 stable stable trend -0.5 (-1.2, 0.2)
Huntington County No 239.6 (209.9, 272.4) 9 (1, 68) 50 stable stable trend -0.5 (-1.1, 0.2)
Putnam County No 238.0 (209.5, 269.5) 10 (1, 68) 52 stable stable trend 11.0 (-6.0, 30.9)
Clay County No 235.7 (202.8, 272.7) 11 (1, 79) 39 falling falling trend -1.5 (-2.2, -0.8)
Grant County No 235.4 (214.5, 258.0) 12 (2, 55) 98 falling falling trend -0.8 (-1.2, -0.4)
Vermillion County No 234.0 (192.6, 282.5) 13 (1, 88) 24 stable stable trend -0.9 (-1.8, 0.1)
Sullivan County No 233.1 (195.7, 275.7) 14 (1, 85) 29 stable stable trend -0.4 (-1.1, 0.2)
Wabash County No 231.8 (202.6, 264.3) 15 (2, 79) 48 stable stable trend -0.5 (-1.2, 0.1)
Union County No 227.9 (167.5, 304.4) 16 (1, 92) 10 stable stable trend -0.6 (-1.7, 0.5)
Henry County No 227.2 (203.7, 253.0) 17 (3, 70) 70 falling falling trend -0.7 (-1.2, -0.3)
Jackson County No 227.1 (200.7, 256.1) 18 (3, 76) 56 falling falling trend -5.8 (-9.0, -2.3)
Shelby County No 225.2 (199.8, 253.1) 19 (3, 78) 60 falling falling trend -1.0 (-1.7, -0.2)
Posey County No 225.1 (192.3, 262.2) 20 (2, 85) 36 falling falling trend -1.1 (-1.8, -0.5)
Miami County No 222.8 (195.1, 253.5) 21 (3, 81) 49 falling falling trend -0.9 (-1.4, -0.4)
Starke County No 222.6 (190.2, 259.6) 22 (2, 86) 36 falling falling trend -1.1 (-1.8, -0.3)
Vigo County No 222.4 (204.8, 241.2) 23 (6, 66) 125 falling falling trend -1.2 (-1.6, -0.7)
Orange County No 221.8 (186.5, 262.5) 24 (2, 88) 29 falling falling trend -1.2 (-2.0, -0.4)
Howard County No 221.8 (203.7, 241.2) 25 (6, 69) 115 falling falling trend -1.3 (-1.8, -0.8)
Cass County No 221.0 (194.2, 250.7) 26 (3, 82) 51 falling falling trend -1.3 (-1.8, -0.8)
Owen County No 220.5 (185.7, 260.5) 27 (2, 89) 31 stable stable trend -0.5 (-1.3, 0.4)
Benton County No 220.0 (165.9, 287.0) 28 (1, 92) 12 stable stable trend -0.8 (-2.0, 0.3)
Pike County No 218.1 (174.5, 270.2) 29 (1, 92) 18 falling falling trend -1.1 (-2.1, -0.1)
Noble County No 218.0 (192.2, 246.2) 30 (5, 82) 57 falling falling trend -0.9 (-1.5, -0.3)
Washington County No 217.6 (185.9, 253.4) 31 (2, 88) 36 falling falling trend -1.4 (-2.0, -0.7)
Randolph County No 216.2 (185.4, 251.2) 32 (3, 88) 36 stable stable trend -0.3 (-1.1, 0.6)
LaPorte County No 215.1 (198.9, 232.2) 33 (10, 71) 140 falling falling trend -1.1 (-1.4, -0.9)
Fulton County No 215.0 (179.8, 255.5) 34 (2, 90) 28 falling falling trend -1.4 (-2.2, -0.6)
Fayette County No 214.8 (182.5, 251.8) 35 (3, 90) 33 falling falling trend -1.2 (-1.8, -0.6)
Clinton County No 214.5 (184.9, 247.7) 36 (3, 87) 39 stable stable trend -0.4 (-1.2, 0.3)
Adams County No 214.2 (184.8, 246.9) 37 (3, 89) 40 stable stable trend -0.2 (-0.9, 0.5)
Wells County No 213.1 (182.7, 247.4) 38 (3, 89) 37 falling falling trend -1.0 (-1.8, -0.2)
Harrison County No 212.8 (186.7, 241.6) 39 (4, 86) 52 falling falling trend -1.1 (-1.9, -0.3)
Delaware County No 212.1 (196.2, 229.0) 40 (12, 75) 136 falling falling trend -1.2 (-1.6, -0.8)
Ripley County No 211.6 (181.6, 245.3) 41 (4, 89) 37 falling falling trend -0.8 (-1.4, -0.1)
White County No 211.3 (180.4, 246.5) 42 (3, 89) 35 falling falling trend -1.2 (-1.9, -0.5)
Clark County No 210.6 (193.8, 228.5) 43 (12, 76) 127 falling falling trend -1.5 (-1.9, -1.2)
Ohio County No 210.4 (154.1, 284.6) 44 (1, 92) 10 falling falling trend -1.7 (-3.1, -0.2)
Wayne County No 209.9 (190.2, 231.2) 45 (10, 81) 87 falling falling trend -1.1 (-1.6, -0.6)
Martin County No 209.7 (162.6, 267.3) 46 (1, 92) 14 falling falling trend -1.8 (-2.9, -0.5)
Marion County No 209.5 (203.0, 216.1) 47 (27, 61) 858 falling falling trend -1.6 (-1.8, -1.4)
Vanderburgh County No 209.4 (196.6, 222.7) 48 (17, 74) 213 falling falling trend -1.5 (-1.8, -1.2)
Lawrence County No 209.2 (186.3, 234.5) 49 (9, 85) 63 falling falling trend -1.1 (-1.6, -0.6)
Parke County No 209.2 (172.0, 252.8) 50 (3, 92) 24 falling falling trend -1.2 (-2.0, -0.3)
Floyd County No 207.9 (188.0, 229.3) 51 (10, 83) 87 falling falling trend -1.6 (-2.0, -1.3)
Knox County No 207.4 (180.5, 237.3) 52 (6, 89) 45 falling falling trend -1.3 (-1.9, -0.8)
DeKalb County No 206.8 (181.0, 235.4) 53 (6, 89) 50 stable stable trend -0.7 (-1.4, 0.0)
Decatur County No 206.4 (174.1, 243.0) 54 (4, 91) 30 falling falling trend -0.9 (-1.5, -0.3)
Dearborn County No 205.5 (182.4, 230.8) 55 (10, 88) 63 falling falling trend -1.6 (-2.2, -1.0)
LaGrange County No 205.4 (176.4, 237.7) 56 (6, 91) 38 falling falling trend -1.0 (-1.7, -0.4)
Madison County No 203.9 (189.7, 218.9) 57 (20, 80) 159 falling falling trend -1.4 (-1.6, -1.1)
Newton County No 203.2 (164.3, 249.5) 58 (3, 92) 20 falling falling trend -1.9 (-2.8, -1.0)
Whitley County No 200.5 (172.9, 231.5) 59 (8, 91) 41 falling falling trend -1.1 (-1.8, -0.4)
Lake County No 199.2 (191.5, 207.2) 60 (38, 76) 533 falling falling trend -1.8 (-2.0, -1.6)
Allen County No 198.6 (189.3, 208.2) 61 (34, 79) 366 falling falling trend -1.5 (-1.7, -1.3)
Gibson County No 198.1 (170.7, 228.8) 62 (8, 91) 39 falling falling trend -1.4 (-2.2, -0.7)
Rush County No 197.1 (159.6, 241.3) 63 (4, 92) 20 falling falling trend -1.4 (-2.2, -0.7)
Johnson County No 197.0 (182.7, 212.1) 64 (28, 86) 148 falling falling trend -1.6 (-1.9, -1.3)
Switzerland County No 195.9 (149.9, 252.3) 65 (2, 92) 14 falling falling trend -1.9 (-3.3, -0.5)
Montgomery County No 195.3 (170.6, 222.8) 66 (11, 91) 47 falling falling trend -1.6 (-2.1, -1.0)
Franklin County No 195.0 (162.9, 232.1) 67 (7, 92) 28 stable stable trend -0.6 (-1.6, 0.3)
Perry County No 193.9 (160.1, 233.0) 68 (7, 92) 24 falling falling trend -0.9 (-1.8, -0.1)
St. Joseph County No 193.4 (183.1, 204.2) 69 (41, 84) 278 falling falling trend -1.5 (-1.7, -1.3)
Jay County No 192.5 (157.8, 232.9) 70 (6, 92) 22 stable stable trend -12.4 (-23.3, 0.0)
Brown County No 191.5 (156.3, 233.8) 71 (7, 92) 23 stable stable trend -0.6 (-1.6, 0.5)
Hendricks County No 189.6 (175.6, 204.4) 72 (37, 89) 145 falling falling trend -1.7 (-2.1, -1.4)
Hancock County No 189.4 (171.0, 209.3) 73 (25, 90) 81 falling falling trend -1.0 (-1.3, -0.6)
Porter County No 189.3 (176.5, 202.8) 74 (40, 88) 178 falling falling trend -1.4 (-1.8, -1.1)
Morgan County No 189.1 (170.0, 209.9) 75 (25, 91) 79 falling falling trend -1.5 (-2.1, -1.0)
Carroll County No 189.1 (156.1, 227.4) 76 (8, 92) 24 stable stable trend -0.9 (-1.8, 0.0)
Steuben County No 187.9 (163.3, 215.4) 77 (18, 92) 45 falling falling trend -1.6 (-2.4, -0.8)
Daviess County No 187.3 (159.0, 219.2) 78 (15, 92) 33 falling falling trend -1.5 (-2.1, -0.8)
Marshall County No 187.1 (164.6, 211.9) 79 (24, 92) 52 falling falling trend -1.6 (-2.1, -1.0)
Boone County No 184.2 (162.4, 207.9) 80 (26, 92) 56 falling falling trend -3.7 (-5.2, -2.2)
Elkhart County No 183.4 (171.6, 195.7) 81 (51, 90) 188 falling falling trend -1.3 (-1.6, -1.0)
Dubois County No 182.6 (159.0, 208.8) 82 (25, 92) 45 falling falling trend -1.5 (-2.1, -0.8)
Spencer County No 180.9 (150.4, 216.5) 83 (18, 92) 26 falling falling trend -1.8 (-2.5, -1.1)
Jasper County No 177.8 (151.9, 207.1) 84 (26, 92) 36 falling falling trend -10.6 (-18.9, -1.5)
Warrick County No 176.4 (157.2, 197.4) 85 (40, 92) 65 falling falling trend -1.9 (-2.4, -1.3)
Kosciusko County No 175.3 (157.9, 194.2) 86 (50, 92) 78 falling falling trend -1.4 (-1.9, -0.8)
Tippecanoe County No 173.6 (160.3, 187.6) 87 (60, 92) 133 falling falling trend -2.1 (-2.5, -1.7)
Warren County No 169.2 (124.9, 226.3) 88 (7, 92) 10 falling falling trend -2.8 (-4.4, -1.1)
Bartholomew County No 168.7 (151.9, 186.8) 89 (60, 92) 77 falling falling trend -5.1 (-8.1, -2.0)
Monroe County No 168.3 (154.0, 183.5) 90 (66, 92) 107 falling falling trend -1.7 (-2.1, -1.4)
Tipton County No 167.4 (132.3, 209.7) 91 (17, 92) 17 falling falling trend -1.7 (-2.6, -0.8)
Hamilton County No 150.4 (141.0, 160.3) 92 (86, 92) 207 falling falling trend -1.8 (-2.1, -1.4)
Notes:
Created by statecancerprofiles.cancer.gov on 12/04/2022 9:15 pm.

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.



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.

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