Return to Home Mortality > Table

Death Rates Table

Data Options

Death Rate Report for Michigan by County

All Cancer Sites, 2018-2022

All Races (includes Hispanic), Both Sexes, Ages <65

Sorted by CI*Rank
County
 sort alphabetically by name ascending
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
Michigan N/A Yes 49.1 (48.5, 49.7) N/A 5,624 falling falling trend -1.5 (-1.6, -0.9)
United States N/A Yes 45.0 (44.9, 45.1) N/A 161,722 falling falling trend -2.1 (-2.4, -1.9)
Clare County Rural Yes 70.5 (58.0, 85.2) 1 (1, 47) 28 falling falling trend -1.3 (-2.2, -0.5)
Kalkaska County Urban Yes 69.8 (54.0, 89.3) 2 (1, 64) 16 stable stable trend -0.4 (-1.7, 1.2)
Iosco County Rural Yes 69.7 (55.2, 87.3) 3 (1, 60) 21 stable stable trend -1.0 (-2.4, 0.2)
Roscommon County Rural Yes 68.6 (54.3, 86.4) 4 (1, 63) 22 stable stable trend 0.1 (-1.2, 1.4)
Alcona County Rural Yes 68.5 (48.5, 97.2) 5 (1, 77) 11 stable stable trend -0.4 (-1.6, 0.8)
Sanilac County Rural Yes 67.6 (56.9, 80.0) 6 (1, 49) 34 stable stable trend -0.3 (-1.2, 0.6)
Gladwin County Rural Yes 66.4 (52.8, 82.9) 7 (1, 63) 21 falling falling trend -1.1 (-1.9, -0.3)
Iron County Rural Yes 65.3 (44.8, 93.1) 8 (1, 80) 9 stable stable trend -1.7 (-3.4, 0.0)
Arenac County Rural Yes 64.5 (47.3, 86.6) 9 (1, 78) 13 stable stable trend -0.1 (-1.6, 1.4)
Lake County Rural Yes 64.3 (46.3, 88.6) 10 (1, 78) 11 falling falling trend -2.2 (-3.6, -0.8)
Benzie County Urban Yes 63.6 (47.7, 83.7) 11 (1, 74) 14 stable stable trend -0.9 (-2.1, 0.4)
Montmorency County Rural Yes 62.7 (40.0, 95.3) 12 (1, 81) 7 stable stable trend -1.3 (-3.3, 0.5)
Luce County Rural Yes 62.7 (35.6, 104.4) 13 (1, 81) 4
*
*
Ogemaw County Rural Yes 62.5 (48.3, 80.3) 14 (1, 74) 17 falling falling trend -1.4 (-2.2, -0.5)
Crawford County Rural Yes 60.9 (45.0, 82.1) 15 (1, 78) 12 stable stable trend -0.6 (-1.8, 0.6)
Hillsdale County Rural Yes 59.7 (50.4, 70.5) 16 (2, 66) 33 falling falling trend -1.0 (-1.8, -0.1)
Calhoun County Urban Yes 59.5 (53.9, 65.7) 17 (6, 50) 90 falling falling trend -1.0 (-1.4, -0.6)
Wexford County Rural Yes 59.4 (48.4, 72.4) 18 (1, 70) 23 stable stable trend -0.8 (-1.8, 0.3)
Newaygo County Rural Yes 59.4 (50.2, 69.9) 19 (2, 65) 35 stable stable trend -0.9 (-1.7, 0.0)
Osceola County Rural Yes 59.1 (46.3, 74.8) 20 (1, 75) 17 stable stable trend -0.7 (-1.8, 0.4)
Isabella County Rural Yes 58.9 (49.8, 69.2) 21 (3, 65) 33 stable stable trend -0.7 (-1.7, 0.3)
Mason County Rural Yes 58.9 (46.9, 73.4) 22 (1, 73) 21 stable stable trend -0.7 (-2.0, 0.6)
Tuscola County Rural Yes 58.6 (50.0, 68.4) 23 (3, 66) 39 falling falling trend -1.1 (-1.8, -0.5)
Gratiot County Rural Yes 58.5 (48.5, 70.1) 24 (2, 71) 26 falling falling trend -0.9 (-1.6, -0.1)
Alpena County Rural Yes 58.5 (47.1, 72.3) 25 (1, 72) 22 stable stable trend 0.3 (-11.4, 11.8)
Bay County Urban Yes 58.1 (51.9, 65.0) 26 (6, 57) 72 falling falling trend -1.0 (-1.4, -0.6)
Montcalm County Urban Yes 58.0 (50.5, 66.4) 27 (5, 65) 46 falling falling trend -1.4 (-2.0, -0.8)
Houghton County Rural Yes 57.2 (45.9, 70.5) 28 (2, 74) 20 falling falling trend -1.4 (-2.4, -0.4)
Chippewa County Rural Yes 56.6 (46.3, 68.9) 29 (2, 73) 23 stable stable trend 0.0 (-1.0, 1.2)
Genesee County Urban Yes 56.5 (53.4, 59.8) 30 (13, 48) 268 falling falling trend -1.3 (-1.6, -1.0)
Mecosta County Rural Yes 56.4 (46.1, 68.6) 31 (2, 73) 25 stable stable trend -1.1 (-2.1, 0.0)
Muskegon County Urban Yes 56.3 (51.5, 61.5) 32 (10, 55) 113 falling falling trend -1.2 (-1.6, -0.7)
Alger County Rural Yes 56.0 (37.2, 83.3) 33 (1, 81) 7 stable stable trend -0.3 (-1.6, 1.0)
Jackson County Urban Yes 55.9 (51.0, 61.2) 34 (10, 58) 106 falling falling trend -1.4 (-1.9, -0.9)
Branch County Rural Yes 54.2 (45.2, 64.8) 35 (5, 75) 28 falling falling trend -1.6 (-2.4, -0.7)
Oceana County Rural Yes 54.0 (42.6, 67.9) 36 (3, 79) 18 falling falling trend -1.4 (-2.3, -0.4)
Wayne County Urban Yes 53.8 (52.3, 55.4) 37 (24, 49) 1,050 falling falling trend -2.7 (-5.3, -2.0)
Oscoda County Rural Yes 53.4 (33.9, 82.3) 38 (1, 81) 6 stable stable trend -0.9 (-2.5, 0.6)
Saginaw County Urban Yes 53.2 (48.6, 58.1) 39 (16, 64) 114 falling falling trend -1.4 (-1.8, -1.0)
Schoolcraft County Rural Yes 53.1 (34.4, 81.3) 40 (1, 81) 6 stable stable trend -0.8 (-2.4, 1.0)
St. Joseph County Rural Yes 53.1 (45.3, 61.9) 41 (9, 73) 37 falling falling trend -1.6 (-2.0, -1.1)
Berrien County Urban Yes 52.6 (47.7, 57.9) 42 (17, 66) 96 falling falling trend -1.4 (-1.9, -0.9)
St. Clair County Urban Yes 52.1 (47.4, 57.1) 43 (17, 66) 106 falling falling trend -1.4 (-1.9, -1.0)
Antrim County Rural Yes 51.9 (39.7, 67.3) 44 (3, 80) 15 stable stable trend -1.1 (-2.1, 0.0)
Charlevoix County Rural Yes 51.6 (39.9, 66.1) 45 (3, 80) 16 stable stable trend 0.2 (-1.0, 7.8)
Lenawee County Rural Yes 51.4 (45.4, 58.1) 46 (15, 71) 59 falling falling trend -1.3 (-1.9, -0.7)
Midland County Urban Yes 51.4 (45.0, 58.7) 47 (13, 71) 50 falling falling trend -1.1 (-1.7, -0.5)
Manistee County Rural Yes 51.2 (39.6, 65.8) 48 (3, 80) 16 falling falling trend -1.7 (-2.5, -0.9)
Macomb County Urban Yes 51.1 (49.1, 53.2) 49 (32, 60) 531 falling falling trend -1.4 (-1.6, -1.3)
Shiawassee County Rural Yes 50.9 (43.9, 58.7) 50 (14, 74) 44 falling falling trend -1.2 (-1.8, -0.6)
Ingham County Urban Yes 50.7 (46.8, 54.8) 51 (24, 67) 134 falling falling trend -3.2 (-6.6, -1.4)
Missaukee County Rural Yes 50.6 (35.8, 70.0) 52 (1, 81) 9 stable stable trend -0.8 (-2.0, 0.4)
Cheboygan County Rural Yes 49.7 (38.0, 64.3) 53 (5, 81) 16 falling falling trend -1.5 (-2.9, -0.3)
Cass County Urban Yes 49.4 (41.5, 58.6) 54 (12, 78) 32 falling falling trend -1.3 (-2.1, -0.6)
Van Buren County Rural Yes 49.3 (42.7, 56.7) 55 (17, 75) 46 falling falling trend -1.6 (-2.4, -0.8)
Delta County Rural Yes 49.0 (39.3, 60.7) 56 (8, 80) 21 stable stable trend 11.9 (-2.4, 22.7)
Monroe County Urban Yes 48.9 (44.3, 54.0) 57 (27, 72) 92 falling falling trend -1.6 (-2.1, -1.2)
Kalamazoo County Urban Yes 48.4 (44.5, 52.5) 58 (31, 71) 124 falling falling trend -1.4 (-1.9, -0.9)
Baraga County Rural Yes 48.0 (30.0, 74.7) 59 (1, 81) 5 falling falling trend -26.5 (-47.5, -1.1)
Ionia County Urban Yes 47.7 (40.8, 55.4) 60 (19, 78) 36 falling falling trend -1.5 (-2.1, -0.9)
Otsego County Rural Yes 47.3 (36.1, 61.3) 61 (7, 81) 14 stable stable trend -1.1 (-2.3, 0.0)
Allegan County Rural Yes 47.1 (41.9, 52.8) 62 (29, 76) 67 falling falling trend -1.4 (-1.9, -0.9)
Marquette County Rural Yes 46.8 (39.7, 55.0) 63 (20, 79) 35 falling falling trend -1.2 (-1.9, -0.4)
Mackinac County Rural Yes 46.5 (30.9, 69.3) 64 (2, 81) 7 stable stable trend 0.5 (-3.0, 9.9)
Eaton County Urban Yes 45.6 (40.3, 51.5) 65 (32, 78) 59 falling falling trend -1.1 (-1.6, -0.7)
Lapeer County Urban Yes 45.6 (39.9, 51.9) 66 (28, 78) 55 falling falling trend -1.8 (-2.5, -1.0)
Presque Isle County Rural Yes 45.4 (29.6, 67.9) 67 (2, 81) 7 falling falling trend -2.3 (-4.4, -0.6)
Barry County Urban Yes 44.7 (37.7, 52.7) 68 (25, 80) 34 falling falling trend -1.5 (-2.1, -0.9)
Emmet County Rural Yes 44.7 (35.5, 55.9) 69 (15, 81) 19 falling falling trend -1.7 (-8.4, -0.4)
Gogebic County Rural Yes 44.6 (31.0, 63.2) 70 (5, 81) 9 falling falling trend -1.7 (-2.9, -0.6)
Menominee County Rural Yes 44.3 (34.0, 57.6) 71 (13, 81) 15 falling falling trend -1.6 (-2.5, -0.8)
Huron County Rural Yes 44.3 (34.7, 56.2) 72 (15, 81) 18 falling falling trend -1.2 (-2.0, -0.3)
Kent County Urban Yes 43.0 (40.8, 45.4) 73 (57, 76) 294 falling falling trend -1.6 (-1.9, -1.4)
Dickinson County Rural Yes 41.3 (31.2, 54.0) 74 (21, 81) 14 falling falling trend -1.9 (-2.9, -0.9)
Grand Traverse County Urban Yes 40.6 (35.2, 46.7) 75 (48, 81) 46 falling falling trend -1.9 (-2.6, -1.0)
Ottawa County Urban Yes 40.2 (37.0, 43.7) 76 (60, 80) 120 falling falling trend -1.3 (-1.7, -0.7)
Livingston County Urban Yes 39.2 (35.5, 43.2) 77 (62, 81) 97 falling falling trend -1.9 (-2.3, -1.4)
Oakland County Urban Yes 37.9 (36.5, 39.4) 78 (69, 81) 572 falling falling trend -2.1 (-2.2, -1.9)
Washtenaw County Urban Yes 37.8 (34.9, 40.9) 79 (66, 81) 133 falling falling trend -1.9 (-2.3, -1.6)
Clinton County Urban Yes 34.6 (29.3, 40.6) 80 (65, 81) 33 falling falling trend -2.2 (-3.0, -1.4)
Leelanau County Urban Yes 30.7 (21.2, 43.9) 81 (46, 81) 10 falling falling trend -2.2 (-3.8, -0.6)
Keweenaw County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Ontonagon County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Notes:
Created by statecancerprofiles.cancer.gov on 10/11/2024 10:09 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.


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