Return to Home Mortality > Table

Death Rates Table

Data Options

Death Rate Report for Mississippi 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 ascending
Average Annual Count
 sort by count descending
Recent Trend
Recent 5-Year Trend in Death Rates
(95% Confidence Interval)
 sort by trend descending
Mississippi N/A Yes 64.2 (62.9, 65.5) N/A 2,050 falling falling trend -1.1 (-1.2, -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)
Lafayette County Rural Yes 36.2 (29.0, 44.7) 81 (74, 81) 18 falling falling trend -2.7 (-3.4, -1.9)
Rankin County Urban Yes 44.1 (39.7, 48.9) 80 (71, 81) 75 falling falling trend -2.1 (-2.6, -1.5)
Lamar County Urban Yes 45.5 (38.3, 53.6) 79 (65, 81) 30 falling falling trend -2.0 (-2.8, -1.0)
Newton County Rural Yes 50.0 (37.2, 65.8) 78 (30, 81) 11 falling falling trend -1.8 (-3.3, -0.4)
Clarke County Rural Yes 50.8 (36.7, 69.1) 77 (26, 81) 10 stable stable trend -0.4 (-1.6, 1.0)
Madison County Urban Yes 51.6 (45.9, 57.8) 76 (57, 80) 64 falling falling trend -5.9 (-7.1, -5.0)
Franklin County Rural Yes 51.7 (32.2, 80.4) 75 (11, 81) 5 falling falling trend -2.7 (-4.2, -1.3)
DeSoto County Urban Yes 52.2 (47.7, 57.0) 74 (60, 79) 102 falling falling trend -1.4 (-1.8, -0.8)
Lincoln County Rural Yes 55.0 (44.8, 67.0) 73 (29, 81) 22 falling falling trend -14.3 (-25.3, -1.8)
Clay County Rural Yes 55.2 (41.4, 72.6) 72 (18, 81) 12 falling falling trend -1.9 (-2.9, -0.9)
Amite County Rural Yes 55.9 (40.4, 76.8) 71 (13, 81) 10 stable stable trend -0.3 (-1.6, 1.0)
Lauderdale County Rural Yes 56.8 (49.2, 65.2) 70 (38, 79) 44 falling falling trend -2.9 (-10.4, -1.9)
Benton County Urban Yes 57.1 (34.8, 89.2) 69 (5, 81) 5 stable stable trend -0.4 (-2.6, 1.8)
Hancock County Urban Yes 58.1 (48.9, 68.6) 68 (28, 79) 34 falling falling trend -1.2 (-2.1, -0.3)
Tate County Urban Yes 58.4 (46.6, 72.4) 67 (21, 80) 18 falling falling trend -1.3 (-2.5, -0.1)
Oktibbeha County Rural Yes 58.8 (48.0, 71.3) 66 (21, 79) 23 falling falling trend -1.2 (-2.2, -0.2)
Attala County Rural Yes 59.7 (44.9, 78.3) 65 (13, 81) 12 stable stable trend -0.6 (-1.7, 0.5)
Harrison County Urban Yes 60.0 (55.4, 64.8) 64 (41, 74) 140 falling falling trend -5.6 (-10.6, -1.4)
Jackson County Urban Yes 60.4 (55.0, 66.2) 63 (36, 74) 100 falling falling trend -1.6 (-2.0, -1.2)
Smith County Rural Yes 60.7 (43.9, 82.3) 62 (8, 81) 9 falling falling trend -4.2 (-22.4, -1.5)
Alcorn County Rural Yes 61.6 (50.5, 74.6) 61 (18, 79) 23 falling falling trend -1.5 (-2.4, -0.6)
Scott County Urban Yes 61.7 (49.5, 76.3) 60 (15, 80) 19 stable stable trend -1.0 (-2.2, 0.4)
Jones County Rural Yes 61.8 (53.4, 71.1) 59 (24, 77) 43 falling falling trend -1.4 (-2.1, -0.7)
Leake County Rural Yes 64.7 (50.1, 82.4) 58 (9, 79) 15 stable stable trend -1.1 (-2.2, 0.1)
Union County Rural Yes 65.1 (52.2, 80.4) 57 (12, 79) 19 falling falling trend -1.2 (-2.3, -0.1)
Pearl River County Rural Yes 65.2 (55.9, 75.6) 56 (17, 76) 40 falling falling trend -1.0 (-1.7, -0.3)
Simpson County Urban Yes 65.2 (52.0, 81.0) 55 (10, 78) 19 falling falling trend -1.0 (-1.9, -0.1)
Hinds County Urban Yes 65.6 (60.9, 70.6) 54 (29, 67) 155 stable stable trend 0.4 (-0.4, 1.4)
Stone County Urban Yes 66.0 (49.9, 85.9) 53 (6, 80) 12 stable stable trend -1.2 (-2.6, 0.5)
Winston County Rural Yes 66.3 (50.2, 86.3) 52 (6, 79) 13 stable stable trend -1.0 (-2.5, 0.4)
Pike County Rural Yes 67.0 (55.9, 79.7) 51 (12, 75) 28 falling falling trend -1.1 (-2.0, -0.1)
Lowndes County Rural Yes 67.0 (57.6, 77.5) 50 (15, 73) 40 stable stable trend 0.2 (-1.1, 7.0)
Forrest County Urban Yes 67.2 (58.7, 76.6) 49 (17, 71) 48 falling falling trend -1.1 (-1.5, -0.6)
Wayne County Rural Yes 67.5 (52.1, 86.2) 48 (6, 79) 15 stable stable trend -0.4 (-1.5, 0.8)
Tippah County Rural Yes 67.5 (52.6, 85.5) 47 (7, 79) 15 stable stable trend -0.7 (-1.6, 0.3)
Copiah County Urban Yes 67.7 (54.6, 83.3) 46 (9, 77) 21 stable stable trend -0.9 (-1.9, 0.1)
Montgomery County Rural Yes 67.8 (47.0, 95.6) 45 (3, 81) 8 stable stable trend -0.2 (-1.6, 1.2)
Kemper County Rural Yes 68.8 (45.8, 100.1) 44 (3, 81) 6 stable stable trend 0.7 (-1.2, 2.9)
Greene County Rural Yes 68.9 (51.1, 91.5) 43 (4, 80) 10 stable stable trend -0.6 (-1.6, 0.6)
Monroe County Rural Yes 69.0 (57.0, 83.0) 42 (8, 75) 26 stable stable trend -0.7 (-1.5, 0.2)
Warren County Rural Yes 69.0 (58.5, 81.1) 41 (11, 72) 34 stable stable trend -0.8 (-1.6, 0.0)
George County Rural Yes 69.5 (55.4, 86.2) 40 (6, 77) 18 stable stable trend -1.1 (-2.2, 0.1)
Panola County Rural Yes 70.0 (58.1, 83.8) 39 (9, 75) 27 stable stable trend -0.8 (-1.7, 0.1)
Itawamba County Rural Yes 71.3 (56.9, 88.4) 38 (6, 76) 18 stable stable trend -0.7 (-1.6, 0.1)
Walthall County Rural Yes 71.3 (53.3, 94.1) 37 (4, 79) 12 falling falling trend -1.4 (-2.5, -0.3)
Covington County Rural Yes 71.6 (55.4, 91.3) 36 (4, 78) 14 stable stable trend -0.9 (-1.8, 0.0)
Marion County Rural Yes 71.6 (57.8, 88.0) 35 (6, 77) 20 stable stable trend -0.5 (-1.4, 0.5)
Pontotoc County Rural Yes 72.1 (59.3, 86.9) 34 (6, 74) 24 stable stable trend -0.2 (-1.3, 1.1)
Choctaw County Rural Yes 72.9 (50.3, 103.8) 33 (2, 80) 7 stable stable trend -1.0 (-2.2, 0.2)
Adams County Rural Yes 73.7 (60.5, 89.0) 32 (5, 73) 26 stable stable trend -0.5 (-1.2, 0.1)
Lee County Rural Yes 73.7 (65.7, 82.5) 31 (11, 59) 66 falling falling trend -2.8 (-4.6, -1.7)
Lawrence County Rural Yes 74.7 (53.5, 102.0) 30 (2, 80) 9 stable stable trend 0.2 (-0.7, 1.1)
Calhoun County Rural Yes 75.1 (55.5, 99.8) 29 (2, 78) 11 stable stable trend 0.7 (-0.6, 2.1)
Webster County Rural Yes 75.3 (53.2, 104.3) 28 (2, 80) 8 stable stable trend -0.5 (-2.0, 1.2)
Chickasaw County Rural Yes 75.5 (58.2, 96.7) 27 (3, 76) 14 stable stable trend -1.1 (-2.6, 0.5)
Marshall County Urban Yes 75.8 (63.6, 89.9) 26 (5, 67) 31 falling falling trend -0.9 (-1.6, -0.1)
Yazoo County Urban Yes 76.0 (61.8, 92.6) 25 (4, 74) 21 stable stable trend -0.9 (-1.8, 0.1)
Prentiss County Rural Yes 76.2 (61.3, 93.8) 24 (3, 73) 20 stable stable trend 0.1 (-1.0, 1.4)
Wilkinson County Rural Yes 76.5 (52.3, 108.9) 23 (2, 80) 7 falling falling trend -1.8 (-3.3, -0.4)
Perry County Urban Yes 77.0 (56.4, 103.4) 22 (2, 78) 10 stable stable trend -0.8 (-2.1, 0.6)
Jasper County Rural Yes 78.4 (59.6, 101.6) 21 (2, 77) 13 stable stable trend 17.9 (-1.1, 31.2)
Grenada County Rural Yes 79.6 (63.9, 98.3) 20 (3, 71) 20 stable stable trend -0.5 (-1.4, 0.4)
Carroll County Rural Yes 79.6 (56.8, 109.7) 19 (2, 79) 9 stable stable trend 19.8 (-0.8, 33.7)
Claiborne County Rural Yes 79.7 (53.6, 114.5) 18 (1, 80) 7 stable stable trend -0.6 (-2.4, 1.2)
Tishomingo County Rural Yes 80.2 (63.7, 100.1) 17 (2, 70) 18 stable stable trend -0.2 (-1.3, 1.1)
Neshoba County Rural Yes 80.9 (66.4, 97.8) 16 (3, 67) 23 stable stable trend -0.7 (-1.6, 0.3)
Noxubee County Rural Yes 81.4 (57.0, 112.8) 15 (1, 79) 8 stable stable trend -0.6 (-2.0, 0.9)
Tallahatchie County Rural Yes 81.8 (60.7, 108.3) 14 (2, 75) 11 stable stable trend -0.4 (-1.8, 1.0)
Holmes County Urban Yes 82.6 (63.9, 105.4) 13 (2, 70) 15 stable stable trend -0.2 (-1.2, 0.8)
Sunflower County Rural Yes 85.5 (70.3, 103.4) 12 (2, 57) 23 stable stable trend -0.6 (-1.4, 0.2)
Yalobusha County Rural Yes 85.6 (65.8, 110.5) 11 (2, 70) 14 stable stable trend -1.0 (-2.0, 0.0)
Bolivar County Rural Yes 87.0 (72.7, 103.4) 10 (2, 51) 28 stable stable trend -0.6 (-1.6, 0.3)
Leflore County Rural Yes 88.6 (73.2, 106.5) 9 (2, 56) 25 stable stable trend -0.1 (-1.2, 1.0)
Sharkey County Rural Yes 89.1 (48.6, 150.6) 8 (1, 81) 3
*
*
Jefferson Davis County Rural Yes 89.3 (66.1, 118.8) 7 (1, 74) 11 stable stable trend -1.5 (-3.3, 0.2)
Washington County Rural Yes 89.3 (77.2, 102.9) 6 (2, 38) 44 stable stable trend -0.6 (-1.3, 0.0)
Jefferson County Rural Yes 95.5 (65.6, 135.2) 5 (1, 76) 8 stable stable trend -1.0 (-2.6, 0.7)
Coahoma County Rural Yes 102.7 (83.8, 124.7) 4 (1, 34) 23 stable stable trend -3.4 (-14.2, 0.2)
Tunica County Urban Yes 106.2 (78.5, 140.8) 3 (1, 55) 10 stable stable trend 0.2 (-1.0, 1.5)
Humphreys County Rural Yes 114.3 (81.5, 156.5) 2 (1, 59) 9 stable stable trend 27.6 (-0.4, 50.9)
Quitman County Rural No 142.7 (103.6, 192.9) 1 (1, 23) 10 stable stable trend 0.1 (-1.4, 1.6)
Issaquena County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Notes:
Created by statecancerprofiles.cancer.gov on 10/04/2024 11:58 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.

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