Return to Home Mortality > Table

Death Rates Table

Data Options

Death Rate Report for Kansas 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
Kansas N/A No 179.1 (176.1, 182.1) N/A 2,914 falling falling trend -1.4 (-2.4, -1.3)
United States N/A No 173.2 (173.0, 173.5) N/A 317,428 falling falling trend -1.8 (-1.8, -1.8)
Allen County Rural No 186.3 (146.0, 235.1) 48 (9, 91) 15 stable stable trend -1.1 (-2.2, 0.0)
Anderson County Rural No 187.0 (137.1, 250.7) 47 (5, 92) 10 falling falling trend -1.7 (-3.1, -0.4)
Atchison County Rural No 206.1 (166.1, 253.2) 31 (5, 84) 19 stable stable trend -0.7 (-1.7, 0.2)
Barber County Rural No 264.5 (183.8, 371.8) 5 (1, 87) 8 stable stable trend -0.5 (-1.8, 0.7)
Barton County Rural No 188.5 (159.8, 221.2) 43 (12, 82) 33 falling falling trend -1.4 (-2.3, -0.6)
Bourbon County Rural No 198.5 (158.3, 246.2) 35 (6, 85) 18 stable stable trend -0.7 (-1.7, 0.3)
Brown County Rural No 212.9 (164.0, 273.1) 26 (3, 86) 14 stable stable trend -0.3 (-1.6, 1.1)
Butler County Urban No 188.3 (168.7, 209.7) 44 (20, 74) 72 falling falling trend -2.4 (-7.6, -1.1)
Chautauqua County Rural No 151.2 (97.6, 233.8) 79 (9, 94) 5 stable stable trend -0.8 (-2.9, 1.1)
Cherokee County Urban No 248.3 (209.8, 292.3) 7 (3, 49) 32 falling falling trend -1.1 (-1.8, -0.3)
Clay County Rural No 166.1 (125.2, 219.0) 63 (11, 94) 11 stable stable trend -0.2 (-1.5, 1.2)
Cloud County Rural No 232.8 (178.5, 299.4) 14 (3, 78) 13 stable stable trend -0.2 (-1.5, 1.1)
Coffey County Rural No 189.3 (142.0, 249.3) 42 (6, 92) 11 stable stable trend -0.8 (-2.0, 0.5)
Cowley County Rural No 219.3 (191.7, 250.0) 21 (6, 60) 47 falling falling trend -0.6 (-1.0, -0.1)
Crawford County Rural No 237.2 (207.2, 270.4) 9 (4, 44) 47 falling falling trend -0.8 (-1.4, -0.2)
Decatur County Rural No 126.6 (73.3, 218.3) 94 (14, 94) 3 falling falling trend -32.1 (-57.9, -0.5)
Dickinson County Rural No 182.0 (149.7, 219.7) 54 (12, 89) 23 falling falling trend -1.1 (-1.8, -0.5)
Doniphan County Urban No 224.2 (167.7, 295.3) 16 (3, 86) 11 stable stable trend -0.7 (-2.0, 0.6)
Douglas County Urban No 166.6 (150.2, 184.2) 62 (37, 86) 82 stable stable trend -0.7 (-1.4, 2.5)
Edwards County Rural No 235.3 (147.2, 362.1) 11 (1, 94) 5 stable stable trend -0.7 (-2.5, 1.1)
Elk County Rural No 415.0 (288.4, 587.4) 1 (1, 26) 8 stable stable trend 0.4 (-1.2, 2.0)
Ellis County Rural No 161.3 (133.5, 193.3) 70 (23, 92) 25 falling falling trend -1.3 (-2.1, -0.6)
Ellsworth County Rural No 219.5 (163.1, 291.4) 20 (3, 88) 10 stable stable trend -0.6 (-2.0, 0.9)
Finney County Rural No 144.8 (119.0, 174.4) 84 (40, 94) 24 falling falling trend -1.8 (-2.6, -1.0)
Ford County Rural No 160.5 (131.8, 193.3) 72 (25, 92) 24 falling falling trend -1.7 (-2.5, -1.0)
Franklin County Rural No 216.1 (183.9, 252.5) 23 (6, 71) 35 stable stable trend -0.1 (-0.9, 2.0)
Geary County Urban No 204.8 (167.5, 247.4) 32 (6, 81) 22 falling falling trend -1.5 (-2.3, -0.8)
Gove County Rural No 164.9 (98.6, 269.1) 65 (4, 94) 4 stable stable trend -1.8 (-4.4, 0.4)
Graham County Rural No 131.7 (75.8, 232.2) 91 (10, 94) 3 falling falling trend -2.7 (-5.4, -0.5)
Grant County Rural No 131.7 (84.0, 196.9) 92 (15, 94) 5 stable stable trend -1.9 (-3.9, 0.1)
Gray County Rural No 159.7 (104.9, 234.3) 73 (6, 94) 6 falling falling trend -2.2 (-3.9, -0.5)
Greenwood County Rural No 161.9 (117.4, 222.9) 69 (10, 94) 9 falling falling trend -1.4 (-2.7, -0.2)
Harper County Rural No 316.4 (238.6, 413.5) 3 (1, 43) 12 stable stable trend 0.1 (-1.2, 1.4)
Harvey County Urban No 194.5 (169.3, 222.7) 37 (13, 76) 45 stable stable trend -0.5 (-1.2, 0.2)
Jackson County Urban No 170.5 (133.5, 215.5) 59 (14, 92) 15 falling falling trend -1.3 (-2.4, -0.1)
Jefferson County Urban No 191.5 (157.4, 231.4) 41 (9, 84) 24 falling falling trend -1.0 (-1.7, -0.4)
Jewell County Rural No 192.2 (124.4, 295.0) 38 (3, 94) 6 stable stable trend -0.6 (-2.3, 1.2)
Johnson County Urban No 149.2 (142.9, 155.7) 81 (64, 88) 448 falling falling trend -1.7 (-1.9, -1.4)
Kearny County Rural No 185.3 (111.0, 290.8) 49 (3, 94) 4
*
*
Kingman County Rural No 374.5 (301.4, 461.7) 2 (1, 10) 20 rising rising trend 10.6 (2.6, 30.7)
Kiowa County Rural No 249.6 (153.2, 391.9) 6 (1, 94) 4 stable stable trend 1.4 (-8.0, 14.4)
Labette County Rural No 212.7 (178.0, 252.6) 27 (6, 74) 28 stable stable trend -0.7 (-1.8, 0.2)
Leavenworth County Urban No 191.7 (172.9, 212.0) 40 (18, 72) 82 falling falling trend -1.5 (-2.0, -1.0)
Lincoln County Rural No 145.2 (85.4, 241.9) 83 (7, 94) 4 falling falling trend -26.4 (-46.6, -0.9)
Linn County Urban No 221.2 (176.7, 275.7) 19 (4, 80) 18 stable stable trend -0.4 (-1.6, 0.9)
Logan County Rural No 218.4 (131.2, 346.1) 22 (1, 94) 4 stable stable trend 0.0 (-1.9, 1.9)
Lyon County Rural No 192.0 (162.7, 225.1) 39 (12, 82) 33 stable stable trend -0.7 (-1.4, 0.1)
Marion County Rural No 157.0 (123.3, 198.9) 77 (23, 94) 16 stable stable trend -0.3 (-1.7, 1.1)
Marshall County Rural No 172.4 (130.8, 224.5) 58 (10, 93) 13 falling falling trend -1.2 (-2.3, -0.1)
McPherson County Rural No 159.5 (135.6, 186.8) 74 (33, 91) 33 stable stable trend -0.3 (-1.1, 0.5)
Meade County Rural No 169.4 (104.1, 262.8) 60 (4, 94) 4 stable stable trend -0.8 (-2.0, 0.5)
Miami County Urban No 150.2 (127.2, 176.4) 80 (43, 93) 32 falling falling trend -1.5 (-2.3, -0.6)
Mitchell County Rural No 183.5 (129.3, 255.6) 50 (5, 94) 8 stable stable trend -0.7 (-1.8, 0.4)
Montgomery County Rural No 197.7 (171.2, 227.5) 36 (10, 74) 42 falling falling trend -1.3 (-1.8, -0.7)
Morris County Rural No 206.2 (143.7, 289.2) 30 (3, 93) 8 falling falling trend -1.5 (-2.8, -0.3)
Morton County Rural No 314.0 (210.4, 457.9) 4 (1, 78) 6
*
*
Nemaha County Rural No 208.7 (162.6, 264.8) 29 (4, 87) 15 stable stable trend 1.7 (-0.2, 12.3)
Neosho County Rural No 225.5 (186.2, 271.3) 15 (4, 70) 24 falling falling trend -1.0 (-2.0, -0.1)
Ness County Rural No 213.6 (135.5, 331.4) 25 (2, 94) 5 stable stable trend 0.1 (-1.5, 1.6)
Norton County Rural No 136.9 (89.2, 203.2) 90 (13, 94) 5 falling falling trend -2.5 (-4.1, -1.1)
Osage County Urban No 158.4 (125.6, 197.9) 76 (21, 93) 17 falling falling trend -1.5 (-2.4, -0.6)
Osborne County Rural No 162.3 (105.5, 247.1) 68 (6, 94) 5 falling falling trend -1.6 (-3.2, -0.3)
Ottawa County Rural No 144.2 (94.6, 212.6) 86 (16, 94) 6 stable stable trend -1.6 (-3.3, 0.0)
Pawnee County Rural No 188.3 (134.0, 259.7) 45 (5, 94) 9 stable stable trend -0.3 (-1.9, 1.3)
Phillips County Rural No 233.6 (169.2, 318.7) 13 (2, 86) 9 stable stable trend -1.1 (-2.9, 0.5)
Pottawatomie County Urban No 159.3 (128.6, 194.9) 75 (22, 93) 20 falling falling trend -1.7 (-2.8, -0.6)
Pratt County Rural No 169.2 (124.2, 226.2) 61 (10, 94) 10 stable stable trend -0.9 (-2.2, 0.3)
Rawlins County Rural No 154.5 (91.2, 258.1) 78 (5, 94) 4 falling falling trend -27.3 (-48.8, -0.7)
Reno County Rural No 182.6 (164.1, 202.8) 52 (23, 78) 74 falling falling trend -0.7 (-1.2, -0.2)
Republic County Rural No 237.0 (170.7, 325.7) 10 (2, 89) 9 stable stable trend 3.6 (-10.6, 25.6)
Rice County Rural No 234.9 (182.0, 299.3) 12 (3, 79) 14 stable stable trend -0.8 (-1.8, 0.2)
Riley County Urban No 163.4 (140.8, 188.5) 66 (31, 89) 39 falling falling trend -0.8 (-1.4, -0.1)
Rooks County Rural No 163.1 (111.1, 236.0) 67 (7, 94) 6 falling falling trend -2.7 (-7.6, -1.5)
Rush County Rural No 201.9 (130.7, 307.9) 33 (2, 94) 5 stable stable trend -0.8 (-2.5, 0.8)
Russell County Rural No 243.8 (185.8, 317.1) 8 (2, 76) 13 stable stable trend 7.0 (-0.7, 23.6)
Saline County Rural No 183.2 (163.3, 205.0) 51 (20, 78) 64 falling falling trend -1.1 (-1.7, -0.5)
Scott County Rural No 144.8 (94.0, 216.0) 85 (11, 94) 5 stable stable trend -0.6 (-2.7, 1.6)
Sedgwick County Urban No 182.6 (175.2, 190.2) 53 (34, 65) 493 falling falling trend -1.5 (-1.7, -1.3)
Seward County Rural No 187.2 (146.4, 235.2) 46 (8, 90) 16 falling falling trend -1.3 (-2.4, -0.2)
Shawnee County Urban No 181.4 (169.9, 193.5) 55 (31, 70) 195 falling falling trend -1.5 (-1.8, -1.2)
Sheridan County Rural No 148.0 (83.6, 255.9) 82 (6, 94) 3
*
*
Sherman County Rural No 129.6 (86.8, 189.6) 93 (28, 94) 6 stable stable trend -1.7 (-3.3, 0.0)
Smith County Rural No 160.9 (100.3, 253.2) 71 (5, 94) 5 stable stable trend -1.0 (-2.7, 0.3)
Stafford County Rural No 140.6 (90.5, 215.5) 87 (11, 94) 5 stable stable trend -1.6 (-3.4, 0.2)
Stevens County Rural No 138.3 (84.7, 214.6) 89 (11, 94) 4 stable stable trend -1.5 (-3.5, 0.5)
Sumner County Urban No 214.6 (181.8, 252.1) 24 (6, 68) 33 falling falling trend -1.6 (-2.0, -1.1)
Thomas County Rural No 140.4 (96.6, 198.5) 88 (17, 94) 7 falling falling trend -2.5 (-3.7, -1.5)
Trego County Rural No 179.8 (111.7, 285.8) 56 (3, 94) 4 stable stable trend -0.3 (-1.9, 1.4)
Wabaunsee County Urban No 173.0 (126.1, 234.5) 57 (8, 93) 10 stable stable trend -1.4 (-2.8, 0.1)
Washington County Rural No 165.7 (116.7, 232.2) 64 (9, 94) 8 stable stable trend -0.5 (-2.1, 0.9)
Wichita County Rural No 222.9 (124.5, 374.0) 18 (1, 94) 3
*
*
Wilson County Rural No 224.0 (172.0, 288.2) 17 (3, 82) 13 stable stable trend -0.8 (-2.0, 0.3)
Woodson County Rural No 211.1 (138.4, 317.4) 28 (2, 94) 6 stable stable trend 0.9 (-1.0, 2.8)
Wyandotte County Urban No 200.2 (185.7, 215.5) 34 (16, 59) 155 falling falling trend -7.1 (-10.7, -2.2)
Chase County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Cheyenne County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Clark County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Comanche County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Greeley County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Hamilton County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Haskell County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Hodgeman County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Lane County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Stanton County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Wallace County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Notes:
Created by statecancerprofiles.cancer.gov on 10/09/2024 10:22 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.

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