Return to Home Mortality > Table

Death Rates Table

Data Options

Death Rate Report for North Carolina by County

All Cancer Sites, 2016-2020

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

Sorted by Recentaapc
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 ascending
North Carolina Yes 50.1 (49.5, 50.7) N/A 5,728 falling falling trend -1.8 (-1.9, -1.7)
United States Yes 47.3 (47.2, 47.4) N/A 168,038 falling falling trend -2.3 (-2.6, -2.0)
Duplin County Yes 61.5 (52.7, 71.5) 24 (4, 83) 39 stable stable trend 3.1 (-2.3, 8.9)
Onslow County Yes 71.2 (64.9, 78.0) 8 (1, 32) 99 stable stable trend 2.4 (-0.6, 5.6)
Granville County Yes 55.6 (47.9, 64.2) 54 (11, 90) 41 stable stable trend 1.7 (-6.6, 10.7)
Graham County Yes 62.1 (41.3, 91.2) 23 (1, 99) 6 stable stable trend 0.0 (-1.8, 1.7)
Yancey County Yes 57.4 (43.8, 74.7) 44 (2, 96) 13 stable stable trend -0.2 (-1.3, 1.0)
Davie County Yes 55.7 (46.5, 66.5) 52 (6, 92) 29 stable stable trend -0.4 (-1.4, 0.5)
Anson County Yes 71.5 (57.3, 88.4) 7 (1, 75) 19 stable stable trend -0.5 (-1.2, 0.2)
Alexander County Yes 60.6 (50.3, 72.6) 29 (3, 88) 27 stable stable trend -0.6 (-1.4, 0.1)
Cleveland County Yes 63.2 (56.5, 70.6) 20 (5, 65) 72 stable stable trend -0.6 (-1.2, 0.0)
Jones County Yes 55.3 (36.2, 82.3) 56 (1, 99) 7 stable stable trend -0.6 (-2.3, 1.1)
Scotland County Yes 84.6 (71.6, 99.3) 1 (1, 26) 33 stable stable trend -0.6 (-1.6, 0.4)
Swain County Yes 77.7 (59.2, 100.9) 3 (1, 77) 13 stable stable trend -0.6 (-1.8, 0.6)
McDowell County Yes 66.5 (56.6, 77.7) 13 (2, 71) 36 stable stable trend -0.7 (-1.4, 0.1)
Yadkin County Yes 58.8 (48.6, 70.8) 39 (3, 89) 26 stable stable trend -0.7 (-1.5, 0.1)
Madison County Yes 54.6 (41.7, 70.8) 61 (4, 98) 14 stable stable trend -0.8 (-2.0, 0.4)
Northampton County Yes 64.2 (48.6, 83.8) 18 (1, 93) 14 stable stable trend -0.8 (-2.0, 0.4)
Avery County Yes 51.4 (38.0, 68.9) 69 (4, 99) 11 stable stable trend -0.9 (-2.1, 0.2)
Macon County Yes 48.0 (38.4, 59.7) 81 (21, 98) 21 falling falling trend -0.9 (-1.7, -0.1)
Robeson County Yes 71.5 (65.2, 78.3) 6 (2, 32) 101 falling falling trend -0.9 (-1.4, -0.4)
Stokes County Yes 62.7 (53.1, 73.7) 21 (3, 76) 35 falling falling trend -0.9 (-1.7, -0.1)
Vance County Yes 81.3 (69.7, 94.3) 2 (1, 24) 40 falling falling trend -0.9 (-1.4, -0.4)
Ashe County Yes 45.7 (35.4, 58.6) 87 (20, 99) 16 stable stable trend -1.0 (-2.3, 0.2)
Caldwell County Yes 61.4 (54.4, 69.1) 25 (6, 70) 62 falling falling trend -1.0 (-1.5, -0.6)
Craven County Yes 60.7 (53.8, 68.4) 28 (5, 74) 62 falling falling trend -1.0 (-1.4, -0.5)
Davidson County Yes 56.0 (51.3, 61.2) 48 (19, 78) 111 falling falling trend -1.0 (-1.5, -0.5)
Rutherford County Yes 60.9 (53.0, 69.7) 27 (6, 78) 49 falling falling trend -1.0 (-1.5, -0.5)
Wilkes County Yes 54.6 (47.2, 62.9) 62 (13, 90) 44 falling falling trend -1.0 (-1.6, -0.3)
Beaufort County Yes 60.1 (50.5, 71.2) 32 (4, 85) 33 falling falling trend -1.1 (-1.8, -0.4)
Dare County Yes 56.3 (46.6, 67.7) 47 (6, 93) 28 falling falling trend -1.1 (-1.9, -0.3)
Gates County Yes 53.6 (35.7, 78.0) 64 (1, 99) 7 stable stable trend -1.1 (-2.3, 0.2)
Greene County Yes 62.2 (48.5, 79.0) 22 (1, 93) 15 stable stable trend -1.1 (-2.4, 0.2)
Jackson County Yes 47.2 (37.9, 58.1) 84 (20, 99) 21 falling falling trend -1.1 (-2.1, -0.1)
Alamance County Yes 57.7 (52.7, 63.0) 43 (16, 74) 107 falling falling trend -1.2 (-1.7, -0.7)
Burke County Yes 55.7 (49.3, 62.9) 53 (15, 84) 61 falling falling trend -1.2 (-1.7, -0.7)
Guilford County Yes 48.0 (45.4, 50.7) 80 (61, 89) 273 falling falling trend -1.2 (-1.8, -0.6)
Pasquotank County Yes 65.9 (55.2, 78.2) 14 (1, 74) 30 falling falling trend -1.2 (-2.0, -0.5)
Richmond County Yes 64.6 (54.6, 75.9) 16 (2, 75) 33 falling falling trend -1.2 (-1.9, -0.5)
Surry County Yes 59.5 (52.2, 67.6) 34 (7, 78) 52 falling falling trend -1.2 (-1.8, -0.6)
Caswell County Yes 64.9 (52.1, 80.6) 15 (1, 88) 20 falling falling trend -1.3 (-2.2, -0.4)
Halifax County Yes 73.4 (63.4, 84.6) 5 (1, 45) 45 falling falling trend -1.3 (-1.8, -0.8)
Mitchell County Yes 69.3 (51.8, 91.7) 11 (1, 91) 12 falling falling trend -1.3 (-2.4, -0.1)
Randolph County Yes 57.7 (52.5, 63.3) 42 (15, 75) 98 falling falling trend -1.3 (-1.7, -0.8)
Sampson County Yes 61.1 (53.0, 70.1) 26 (5, 76) 44 falling falling trend -1.3 (-1.9, -0.7)
Cherokee County Yes 55.9 (44.1, 70.4) 50 (3, 94) 19 falling falling trend -1.4 (-2.5, -0.3)
Columbus County Yes 64.4 (55.5, 74.4) 17 (3, 73) 41 falling falling trend -1.4 (-2.1, -0.7)
Cumberland County Yes 60.5 (56.6, 64.7) 30 (13, 59) 185 falling falling trend -1.4 (-1.7, -1.0)
Rockingham County Yes 59.8 (53.3, 66.9) 33 (9, 73) 71 falling falling trend -1.4 (-1.9, -0.9)
Catawba County Yes 55.1 (50.1, 60.4) 58 (22, 80) 100 falling falling trend -1.5 (-1.8, -1.2)
Gaston County Yes 59.1 (54.8, 63.7) 35 (14, 65) 151 falling falling trend -1.5 (-1.8, -1.2)
Haywood County Yes 52.0 (44.5, 60.5) 68 (18, 93) 39 falling falling trend -1.5 (-2.1, -0.9)
Lenoir County Yes 57.8 (49.4, 67.4) 41 (7, 86) 38 falling falling trend -1.5 (-2.1, -1.0)
Nash County Yes 60.4 (53.8, 67.6) 31 (7, 73) 68 falling falling trend -1.5 (-2.0, -0.9)
Washington County Yes 70.7 (50.0, 98.1) 9 (1, 94) 9 stable stable trend -1.5 (-2.9, 0.0)
Carteret County Yes 55.9 (48.5, 64.2) 51 (11, 87) 50 falling falling trend -1.6 (-2.3, -1.0)
Chowan County Yes 58.2 (41.3, 80.6) 40 (1, 98) 9 falling falling trend -1.6 (-2.8, -0.4)
Henderson County Yes 48.6 (43.1, 54.6) 79 (42, 93) 67 falling falling trend -1.6 (-2.3, -1.0)
Polk County Yes 46.9 (34.4, 63.3) 86 (9, 99) 12 falling falling trend -1.6 (-2.6, -0.7)
Stanly County Yes 50.7 (43.3, 59.1) 73 (20, 94) 36 falling falling trend -1.6 (-2.3, -0.9)
Wayne County Yes 63.5 (57.4, 70.1) 19 (5, 61) 87 falling falling trend -1.6 (-2.0, -1.2)
Bertie County Yes 73.7 (57.5, 93.5) 4 (1, 79) 17 falling falling trend -1.7 (-2.7, -0.7)
Edgecombe County Yes 70.5 (61.0, 81.2) 10 (1, 55) 45 falling falling trend -1.7 (-2.1, -1.2)
Pamlico County Yes 57.1 (39.5, 81.3) 45 (1, 99) 9 falling falling trend -1.7 (-2.6, -0.6)
Person County Yes 55.1 (45.7, 66.1) 57 (8, 92) 28 falling falling trend -1.7 (-2.5, -0.9)
Bladen County Yes 67.1 (55.1, 81.1) 12 (1, 81) 26 falling falling trend -1.8 (-2.6, -1.0)
Brunswick County Yes 49.8 (44.7, 55.4) 75 (37, 92) 91 falling falling trend -1.8 (-2.2, -1.4)
Buncombe County Yes 48.0 (44.4, 51.9) 82 (54, 91) 141 falling falling trend -1.8 (-2.2, -1.3)
Clay County Yes 56.6 (37.8, 82.8) 46 (1, 99) 7 falling falling trend -1.8 (-3.5, -0.1)
Lee County Yes 55.5 (47.7, 64.2) 55 (10, 89) 39 falling falling trend -1.8 (-2.5, -1.0)
Lincoln County Yes 54.7 (48.2, 61.9) 60 (16, 86) 56 falling falling trend -1.8 (-2.3, -1.2)
Moore County Yes 49.4 (43.3, 56.2) 77 (32, 94) 53 falling falling trend -1.8 (-2.4, -1.2)
Warren County Yes 58.9 (44.9, 76.6) 37 (1, 94) 15 falling falling trend -1.8 (-3.0, -0.6)
Forsyth County Yes 47.1 (44.1, 50.3) 85 (61, 90) 196 falling falling trend -1.9 (-2.2, -1.5)
Franklin County Yes 54.0 (46.7, 62.3) 63 (12, 91) 43 falling falling trend -1.9 (-2.8, -1.1)
Harnett County Yes 58.9 (53.1, 65.2) 38 (11, 74) 77 falling falling trend -1.9 (-2.4, -1.4)
Wilson County Yes 53.6 (46.8, 61.1) 65 (18, 89) 50 falling falling trend -1.9 (-2.4, -1.4)
Iredell County Yes 47.2 (43.0, 51.8) 83 (55, 93) 97 falling falling trend -2.0 (-2.4, -1.5)
Pitt County Yes 52.8 (47.9, 58.1) 67 (25, 86) 91 falling falling trend -2.1 (-2.6, -1.7)
Union County Yes 42.5 (39.0, 46.3) 91 (74, 96) 110 falling falling trend -2.2 (-2.8, -1.7)
Cabarrus County Yes 43.2 (39.4, 47.4) 89 (69, 96) 96 falling falling trend -2.3 (-2.8, -1.9)
Hyde County Yes 51.2 (27.8, 89.7) 71 (1, 99) 3 falling falling trend -2.3 (-3.8, -0.8)
Johnston County Yes 49.0 (44.9, 53.4) 78 (49, 90) 110 falling falling trend -2.3 (-2.7, -1.9)
Montgomery County Yes 51.3 (40.2, 64.8) 70 (7, 97) 17 falling falling trend -2.3 (-3.4, -1.2)
Chatham County Yes 40.3 (34.2, 47.2) 94 (66, 99) 36 falling falling trend -2.4 (-3.1, -1.7)
Currituck County Yes 51.1 (40.9, 63.6) 72 (10, 97) 19 falling falling trend -2.4 (-3.1, -1.6)
Hertford County Yes 53.1 (40.9, 68.2) 66 (4, 97) 15 falling falling trend -2.4 (-3.3, -1.5)
Hoke County Yes 59.0 (49.8, 69.4) 36 (5, 86) 31 falling falling trend -2.4 (-3.2, -1.6)
New Hanover County Yes 43.0 (39.3, 47.0) 90 (70, 95) 108 falling falling trend -2.4 (-2.9, -1.9)
Watauga County Yes 31.8 (25.0, 40.1) 99 (84, 99) 18 falling falling trend -2.4 (-3.5, -1.3)
Durham County Yes 43.3 (40.1, 46.8) 88 (72, 95) 138 falling falling trend -2.5 (-2.8, -2.2)
Martin County Yes 50.2 (38.3, 65.2) 74 (6, 99) 14 falling falling trend -2.6 (-3.6, -1.5)
Pender County Yes 49.5 (42.3, 57.6) 76 (21, 94) 38 falling falling trend -2.6 (-3.2, -2.0)
Perquimans County Yes 54.7 (38.9, 76.0) 59 (1, 99) 10 falling falling trend -2.7 (-4.0, -1.4)
Wake County Yes 34.9 (33.4, 36.5) 96 (92, 99) 395 falling falling trend -2.7 (-2.9, -2.4)
Alleghany County Yes 40.8 (27.0, 61.1) 93 (14, 99) 6 falling falling trend -2.8 (-4.5, -1.1)
Camden County Yes 33.0 (20.7, 51.4) 98 (30, 99) 5 falling falling trend -2.8 (-4.6, -1.0)
Orange County Yes 33.6 (29.5, 38.2) 97 (90, 99) 51 falling falling trend -2.9 (-3.5, -2.3)
Rowan County Yes 56.0 (50.8, 61.6) 49 (18, 79) 93 falling falling trend -4.5 (-8.1, -0.7)
Mecklenburg County Yes 38.0 (36.4, 39.7) 95 (89, 97) 417 falling falling trend -5.3 (-7.8, -2.7)
Transylvania County Yes 41.6 (32.4, 53.1) 92 (40, 99) 17 stable stable trend -7.1 (-13.9, 0.1)
Tyrrell County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Notes:
Created by statecancerprofiles.cancer.gov on 01/30/2023 9:51 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