Return to Home Mortality > Table

Death Rates Table

Data Options

Death Rate Report for Minnesota by County

All Cancer Sites, 2016-2020

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

Sorted by CI*Rank
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 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
Minnesota No 144.0 (142.8, 145.3) N/A 9,930 falling falling trend -1.6 (-1.8, -1.4)
United States No 149.4 (149.3, 149.6) N/A 599,666 falling falling trend -2.0 (-2.2, -1.8)
Mahnomen County No 205.7 (160.1, 261.1) 1 (1, 78) 15 stable stable trend -0.2 (-1.0, 0.5)
Chippewa County No 188.2 (160.4, 220.1) 2 (1, 59) 36 stable stable trend 0.7 (-0.1, 1.5)
Wadena County No 185.0 (159.0, 214.5) 3 (1, 54) 40 stable stable trend -0.1 (-0.8, 0.6)
Mille Lacs County No 183.7 (163.8, 205.5) 4 (1, 37) 65 stable stable trend -0.5 (-1.1, 0.1)
Polk County No 176.2 (158.5, 195.5) 5 (1, 47) 78 stable stable trend 0.3 (-11.5, 13.8)
Lincoln County No 175.2 (137.6, 221.6) 6 (1, 86) 18 stable stable trend 0.1 (-1.5, 1.7)
Wilkin County No 172.0 (135.4, 216.6) 7 (1, 86) 16 stable stable trend -0.6 (-1.5, 0.3)
Faribault County No 170.1 (145.8, 197.9) 8 (1, 78) 40 stable stable trend 0.1 (-0.5, 0.7)
Norman County No 169.1 (135.1, 210.6) 9 (1, 86) 19 stable stable trend -0.8 (-1.7, 0.1)
Sibley County No 168.4 (143.6, 196.5) 10 (1, 79) 35 stable stable trend -0.5 (-1.1, 0.2)
Cass County No 166.3 (149.9, 184.4) 11 (2, 64) 85 falling falling trend -0.8 (-1.2, -0.4)
Martin County No 165.7 (145.9, 187.8) 12 (2, 72) 58 stable stable trend -0.5 (-1.2, 0.3)
Itasca County No 163.5 (150.1, 178.0) 13 (3, 63) 121 falling falling trend -1.1 (-1.5, -0.8)
Nobles County No 163.4 (142.4, 186.8) 14 (1, 79) 46 stable stable trend -0.7 (-1.3, 0.0)
Clearwater County No 162.4 (132.4, 198.1) 15 (1, 86) 22 stable stable trend -0.7 (-1.4, 0.0)
Brown County No 161.7 (143.7, 181.6) 16 (2, 75) 66 stable stable trend -0.5 (-1.0, 0.1)
Chisago County No 161.5 (147.9, 176.0) 17 (4, 65) 108 stable stable trend 6.1 (-4.4, 17.8)
Aitkin County No 159.6 (139.6, 182.7) 18 (2, 79) 57 falling falling trend -1.3 (-1.9, -0.7)
Renville County No 159.2 (136.0, 185.7) 19 (1, 84) 37 falling falling trend -0.8 (-1.4, -0.1)
Le Sueur County No 159.0 (141.2, 178.5) 20 (3, 78) 60 falling falling trend -0.8 (-1.4, -0.3)
Rock County No 158.0 (129.7, 191.5) 21 (1, 87) 23 stable stable trend -0.5 (-1.3, 0.2)
St. Louis County No 157.8 (151.2, 164.6) 22 (12, 50) 459 falling falling trend -0.9 (-1.2, -0.7)
Watonwan County No 157.5 (130.0, 189.7) 23 (1, 87) 26 stable stable trend -0.7 (-1.6, 0.2)
Goodhue County No 156.9 (143.6, 171.2) 24 (4, 72) 109 falling falling trend -0.8 (-1.2, -0.4)
Yellow Medicine County No 156.7 (128.8, 189.5) 25 (1, 87) 25 stable stable trend -0.7 (-1.4, 0.1)
Isanti County No 156.2 (140.9, 172.9) 26 (5, 77) 78 stable stable trend -0.5 (-1.0, 0.1)
Meeker County No 156.0 (137.8, 176.4) 27 (3, 82) 56 falling falling trend -0.9 (-1.4, -0.4)
Red Lake County No 155.1 (113.3, 209.8) 28 (1, 87) 10 stable stable trend -0.4 (-1.4, 0.7)
Douglas County No 155.0 (141.0, 170.2) 29 (6, 77) 98 stable stable trend -0.5 (-0.9, 0.0)
Morrison County No 154.2 (138.7, 171.1) 30 (5, 80) 77 falling falling trend -0.9 (-1.4, -0.4)
Traverse County No 154.2 (114.3, 208.4) 31 (1, 87) 11 stable stable trend -0.8 (-2.2, 0.7)
Crow Wing County No 153.9 (143.1, 165.5) 32 (9, 72) 161 falling falling trend -1.0 (-1.3, -0.6)
Kanabec County No 153.8 (131.8, 178.9) 33 (2, 85) 37 falling falling trend -1.4 (-2.2, -0.7)
Pine County No 153.7 (137.9, 171.2) 34 (5, 81) 71 falling falling trend -1.0 (-1.6, -0.5)
Winona County No 152.8 (139.1, 167.5) 35 (7, 78) 98 falling falling trend -1.1 (-1.5, -0.8)
Swift County No 152.7 (124.7, 186.0) 36 (1, 87) 23 falling falling trend -1.4 (-2.1, -0.7)
Benton County No 152.6 (136.7, 170.0) 37 (6, 81) 70 falling falling trend -1.4 (-2.0, -0.8)
Fillmore County No 151.3 (132.2, 172.7) 38 (5, 85) 50 falling falling trend -0.8 (-1.2, -0.3)
Hubbard County No 150.5 (132.3, 170.9) 39 (5, 83) 56 falling falling trend -1.1 (-1.8, -0.5)
Pipestone County No 150.3 (123.1, 182.7) 40 (1, 87) 23 stable stable trend -0.6 (-1.5, 0.3)
Grant County No 150.1 (114.1, 195.0) 41 (1, 87) 14 stable stable trend -0.8 (-1.8, 0.1)
Becker County No 149.4 (134.6, 165.7) 42 (8, 82) 78 falling falling trend -0.9 (-1.3, -0.4)
Anoka County No 149.0 (143.5, 154.7) 43 (23, 64) 577 falling falling trend -1.2 (-1.4, -1.0)
Freeborn County No 148.3 (133.1, 165.1) 44 (9, 83) 76 falling falling trend -0.8 (-1.2, -0.4)
Cottonwood County No 148.3 (124.7, 176.0) 45 (3, 87) 30 stable stable trend -0.4 (-1.1, 0.3)
Mower County No 148.0 (133.8, 163.5) 46 (9, 82) 85 falling falling trend -1.1 (-1.6, -0.6)
Carlton County No 148.0 (132.8, 164.6) 47 (8, 82) 72 stable stable trend -8.0 (-15.8, 0.5)
Kittson County No 147.8 (111.3, 195.8) 48 (1, 87) 12 stable stable trend -0.8 (-1.9, 0.4)
Big Stone County No 147.8 (114.6, 190.5) 49 (1, 87) 15 falling falling trend -1.7 (-2.6, -0.9)
Lyon County No 147.7 (129.0, 168.5) 50 (6, 86) 48 stable stable trend -0.4 (-1.0, 0.2)
Clay County No 147.6 (134.7, 161.5) 51 (12, 81) 100 falling falling trend -0.6 (-1.0, -0.1)
Koochiching County No 147.4 (125.1, 173.6) 52 (4, 87) 34 falling falling trend -1.3 (-2.1, -0.5)
Wright County No 147.2 (138.1, 156.8) 53 (19, 76) 201 falling falling trend -1.0 (-1.3, -0.7)
Sherburne County No 146.3 (135.0, 158.3) 54 (15, 80) 131 falling falling trend -1.3 (-1.8, -0.8)
Beltrami County No 146.1 (131.9, 161.4) 55 (12, 83) 82 falling falling trend -1.1 (-1.6, -0.6)
Cook County No 145.8 (111.0, 190.7) 56 (1, 87) 14 stable stable trend -1.2 (-3.0, 0.6)
Ramsey County No 145.2 (140.9, 149.7) 57 (34, 69) 892 falling falling trend -1.8 (-2.0, -1.6)
Lake County No 145.0 (121.4, 173.1) 58 (4, 87) 30 falling falling trend -1.6 (-2.3, -0.9)
Waseca County No 145.0 (124.3, 168.4) 59 (6, 87) 37 falling falling trend -1.2 (-1.9, -0.5)
Wabasha County No 144.6 (127.0, 164.3) 60 (8, 86) 51 falling falling trend -1.1 (-1.6, -0.5)
Rice County No 144.4 (132.7, 157.0) 61 (17, 83) 115 falling falling trend -1.4 (-1.8, -1.0)
Stearns County No 144.3 (136.6, 152.4) 62 (26, 78) 269 falling falling trend -0.9 (-1.2, -0.7)
Stevens County No 144.0 (113.8, 180.1) 63 (2, 87) 18 stable stable trend -0.2 (-1.0, 0.6)
Kandiyohi County No 143.9 (130.1, 158.9) 64 (15, 85) 86 falling falling trend -1.1 (-1.5, -0.7)
Pennington County No 142.7 (119.5, 169.5) 65 (4, 87) 28 falling falling trend -1.1 (-1.8, -0.3)
Blue Earth County No 142.1 (129.8, 155.2) 66 (18, 84) 105 falling falling trend -1.2 (-1.6, -0.8)
Redwood County No 142.1 (120.7, 166.6) 67 (6, 87) 35 falling falling trend -0.9 (-1.4, -0.3)
Jackson County No 141.4 (115.6, 172.2) 68 (3, 87) 24 stable stable trend -0.6 (-1.5, 0.3)
Marshall County No 139.2 (113.2, 170.4) 69 (4, 87) 22 falling falling trend -1.4 (-2.2, -0.6)
Lac qui Parle County No 138.0 (107.3, 176.6) 70 (2, 87) 17 falling falling trend -1.6 (-2.6, -0.7)
Washington County No 137.4 (131.4, 143.7) 71 (45, 82) 407 falling falling trend -1.4 (-1.8, -1.1)
Hennepin County No 137.3 (134.5, 140.1) 72 (56, 78) 1,912 falling falling trend -1.8 (-2.0, -1.6)
Lake of the Woods County No 137.0 (97.8, 190.4) 73 (1, 87) 9 stable stable trend -0.9 (-2.1, 0.3)
Otter Tail County No 137.0 (126.5, 148.2) 74 (30, 85) 141 falling falling trend -1.1 (-1.5, -0.6)
Dodge County No 136.9 (116.4, 160.1) 75 (10, 87) 33 stable stable trend -0.8 (-1.6, 0.0)
Dakota County No 136.9 (132.1, 141.8) 76 (51, 80) 646 falling falling trend -1.5 (-1.7, -1.3)
Scott County No 136.4 (127.3, 145.9) 77 (37, 85) 179 falling falling trend -1.6 (-2.0, -1.2)
McLeod County No 135.9 (121.9, 151.3) 78 (21, 87) 71 falling falling trend -0.8 (-1.4, -0.2)
Nicollet County No 134.1 (118.6, 151.2) 79 (21, 87) 56 falling falling trend -1.2 (-1.9, -0.5)
Steele County No 133.3 (119.1, 148.8) 80 (25, 87) 68 falling falling trend -1.5 (-1.9, -1.1)
Roseau County No 130.5 (109.4, 155.0) 81 (14, 87) 28 falling falling trend -1.6 (-2.2, -1.0)
Pope County No 129.4 (105.7, 157.7) 82 (10, 87) 24 falling falling trend -1.2 (-1.9, -0.4)
Houston County No 128.2 (109.8, 149.2) 83 (22, 87) 38 falling falling trend -1.3 (-1.8, -0.8)
Olmsted County No 127.1 (119.9, 134.6) 84 (64, 87) 242 falling falling trend -1.8 (-2.0, -1.5)
Carver County No 122.9 (113.1, 133.2) 85 (64, 87) 125 falling falling trend -1.5 (-2.0, -1.1)
Todd County Yes 122.1 (106.6, 139.6) 86 (44, 87) 48 falling falling trend -2.9 (-4.0, -1.8)
Murray County Yes 121.2 (97.4, 150.7) 87 (16, 87) 19 stable stable trend -1.0 (-2.0, 0.0)
Notes:
Created by statecancerprofiles.cancer.gov on 12/02/2022 8:45 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.



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