Return to Home Mortality > Table

Death Rates Table

Data Options

Death Rate Report for Indiana by County

Breast, 2016-2020

All Races (includes Hispanic), Female, All Ages

Sorted by CI*Rank
County
 sort alphabetically by name ascending
Met Healthy People Objective of 15.3?
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
Indiana No 20.4 (19.8, 21.1) N/A 892 falling falling trend -1.7 (-1.9, -1.6)
United States No 19.6 (19.5, 19.7) N/A 42,101 falling falling trend -1.3 (-1.4, -1.1)
Fulton County No 31.9 (19.7, 49.7) 1 (1, 65) 5
*
*
Orange County No 29.8 (17.5, 48.0) 2 (1, 68) 4
*
*
Tipton County No 29.8 (17.2, 49.6) 3 (1, 68) 4
*
*
Rush County No 29.3 (16.5, 49.0) 4 (1, 69) 3
*
*
Wells County No 28.9 (18.8, 42.8) 5 (1, 65) 6 stable stable trend -1.0 (-2.9, 1.0)
Scott County No 28.8 (17.5, 44.9) 6 (1, 68) 4
*
*
Grant County No 26.1 (19.7, 34.0) 7 (1, 58) 13 stable stable trend -1.1 (-2.3, 0.1)
Owen County No 25.9 (14.9, 42.5) 8 (1, 69) 4 stable stable trend -0.4 (-2.1, 1.4)
Decatur County No 25.6 (16.1, 39.2) 9 (1, 68) 5 stable stable trend 0.0 (-2.0, 2.0)
Jefferson County No 25.4 (17.1, 36.8) 10 (1, 67) 6 falling falling trend -1.9 (-3.6, -0.1)
Washington County No 25.1 (15.7, 38.6) 11 (1, 69) 5
*
*
Randolph County No 25.1 (15.6, 38.9) 12 (1, 69) 5 falling falling trend -1.9 (-3.7, -0.1)
Franklin County No 25.0 (14.3, 41.1) 13 (1, 69) 4
*
*
Perry County No 24.3 (14.2, 40.3) 14 (1, 69) 4
*
*
Jasper County No 24.0 (15.7, 35.5) 15 (1, 67) 6 falling falling trend -1.7 (-3.4, -0.1)
Adams County No 23.9 (14.9, 36.4) 16 (1, 69) 5
*
*
Madison County No 23.7 (19.3, 29.0) 17 (3, 56) 22 falling falling trend -0.9 (-1.8, -0.1)
Warrick County No 23.7 (17.5, 31.5) 18 (2, 64) 10 stable stable trend -1.2 (-2.5, 0.1)
Greene County No 23.5 (15.2, 35.3) 19 (1, 68) 6 stable stable trend -0.2 (-1.9, 1.6)
Vigo County No 23.5 (18.6, 29.4) 20 (3, 60) 17 falling falling trend -1.3 (-2.2, -0.5)
Morgan County No 23.4 (17.5, 30.8) 21 (2, 65) 11 stable stable trend 0.3 (-0.9, 1.6)
Howard County No 23.3 (17.9, 29.9) 22 (2, 63) 14 stable stable trend -0.8 (-1.7, 0.1)
Johnson County No 23.3 (19.0, 28.2) 23 (4, 55) 22 falling falling trend -1.7 (-2.7, -0.6)
Daviess County No 23.0 (14.8, 34.6) 24 (1, 68) 5 falling falling trend -2.0 (-3.8, -0.1)
LaGrange County No 23.0 (14.2, 35.2) 25 (1, 69) 4
*
*
Boone County No 22.7 (16.5, 30.6) 26 (2, 66) 9 stable stable trend -1.3 (-2.8, 0.3)
Porter County No 22.6 (18.7, 27.2) 27 (5, 56) 25 falling falling trend -1.2 (-2.1, -0.4)
Huntington County No 22.5 (15.0, 32.8) 28 (1, 68) 6 falling falling trend -2.0 (-3.7, -0.3)
St. Joseph County No 22.4 (19.3, 25.9) 29 (7, 53) 40 falling falling trend -1.5 (-2.1, -0.8)
Henry County No 22.3 (15.9, 30.8) 30 (2, 67) 8 stable stable trend -0.4 (-1.8, 1.1)
Lake County No 22.2 (19.9, 24.6) 31 (11, 48) 76 falling falling trend -2.1 (-2.5, -1.6)
Allen County No 21.5 (18.9, 24.5) 32 (11, 53) 50 falling falling trend -1.7 (-2.4, -1.1)
Vanderburgh County No 21.4 (17.7, 25.6) 33 (7, 59) 27 falling falling trend -1.5 (-2.4, -0.6)
Fayette County No 21.1 (12.2, 34.8) 34 (1, 69) 4 falling falling trend -2.2 (-3.8, -0.5)
Marshall County No 21.1 (14.6, 29.8) 35 (2, 68) 7 falling falling trend -2.3 (-3.7, -1.0)
Marion County No 20.9 (19.1, 22.7) 36 (18, 51) 115 falling falling trend -1.7 (-2.1, -1.3)
Clay County No 20.8 (12.5, 33.1) 37 (1, 69) 4 stable stable trend 0.1 (-1.9, 2.1)
Clark County No 20.4 (16.1, 25.7) 38 (7, 65) 16 falling falling trend -2.3 (-3.5, -1.1)
Bartholomew County No 20.3 (15.1, 26.8) 39 (5, 67) 11 falling falling trend -2.1 (-3.1, -1.0)
Jay County No 20.3 (11.3, 34.4) 40 (1, 69) 3
*
*
Steuben County No 20.2 (12.2, 31.7) 41 (2, 69) 5
*
*
Whitley County No 19.5 (12.7, 29.3) 42 (3, 69) 5 falling falling trend -2.5 (-4.2, -0.7)
Knox County No 19.4 (12.5, 29.2) 43 (3, 69) 5 stable stable trend -1.4 (-3.3, 0.5)
Miami County No 19.3 (11.7, 30.3) 44 (2, 69) 4 falling falling trend -2.9 (-4.3, -1.5)
Lawrence County No 19.2 (13.2, 27.4) 45 (4, 69) 7 stable stable trend -1.0 (-2.3, 0.3)
Noble County No 19.2 (12.9, 27.8) 46 (4, 69) 6 falling falling trend -2.6 (-4.0, -1.2)
Hendricks County No 19.2 (15.5, 23.6) 47 (13, 66) 19 falling falling trend -1.5 (-2.5, -0.4)
Wayne County No 19.1 (13.8, 26.0) 48 (6, 68) 9 falling falling trend -2.0 (-2.9, -0.9)
Elkhart County No 19.0 (15.6, 22.9) 49 (15, 65) 24 falling falling trend -2.3 (-3.0, -1.5)
Shelby County No 18.9 (12.4, 28.0) 50 (4, 69) 6 stable stable trend -1.6 (-3.2, 0.1)
Putnam County No 18.9 (12.0, 28.9) 51 (4, 69) 5 falling falling trend -2.7 (-4.7, -0.7)
Delaware County No 18.3 (14.1, 23.4) 52 (13, 68) 14 falling falling trend -2.0 (-3.0, -1.0)
LaPorte County No 17.9 (13.9, 22.8) 53 (14, 68) 15 falling falling trend -2.5 (-3.5, -1.6)
Cass County No 17.7 (11.2, 27.0) 54 (5, 69) 5 falling falling trend -2.9 (-4.8, -1.1)
Harrison County No 17.6 (11.1, 26.9) 55 (5, 69) 5 falling falling trend -3.0 (-4.5, -1.5)
Dubois County No 17.1 (11.5, 25.1) 56 (7, 69) 6 stable stable trend -1.1 (-2.5, 0.3)
Hamilton County No 17.0 (14.4, 20.0) 57 (31, 67) 31 falling falling trend -2.3 (-3.1, -1.5)
Jennings County No 16.9 (9.5, 28.2) 58 (4, 69) 3
*
*
Kosciusko County No 16.7 (12.0, 22.8) 59 (13, 69) 9 falling falling trend -1.9 (-3.2, -0.5)
Dearborn County No 16.7 (11.0, 24.7) 60 (8, 69) 6 stable stable trend -1.4 (-2.8, 0.1)
Hancock County No 16.6 (11.9, 22.8) 61 (14, 69) 8 falling falling trend -1.7 (-3.3, -0.1)
Montgomery County No 16.6 (10.1, 26.0) 62 (6, 69) 4 falling falling trend -2.2 (-3.6, -0.8)
Monroe County No 16.4 (12.7, 21.1) 63 (21, 69) 13 falling falling trend -1.7 (-3.0, -0.3)
Tippecanoe County No 16.3 (12.8, 20.4) 64 (28, 69) 16 falling falling trend -2.5 (-3.6, -1.3)
DeKalb County No 16.1 (10.0, 24.8) 65 (9, 69) 5 falling falling trend -2.1 (-3.7, -0.4)
Gibson County No 16.1 (9.4, 26.2) 66 (5, 69) 4 stable stable trend -0.7 (-3.3, 2.0)
Floyd County Yes 14.7 (10.3, 20.4) 67 (23, 69) 8 falling falling trend -2.1 (-3.5, -0.6)
Wabash County Yes 12.2 (6.9, 21.0) 68 (20, 69) 4 falling falling trend -2.7 (-4.4, -1.0)
Jackson County Yes 11.4 (6.5, 18.7) 69 (31, 69) 3
*
*
Benton County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Blackford County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Brown County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Carroll County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Clinton County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Crawford County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Fountain County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Martin County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Newton County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Ohio County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Parke County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Pike County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Posey County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Pulaski County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Ripley County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Spencer County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Starke County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Sullivan County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Switzerland County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Union County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Vermillion County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Warren County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
White County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Notes:
Created by statecancerprofiles.cancer.gov on 01/31/2023 2:51 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.

* 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.

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