Return to Home Mortality > Table

Death Rates Table

Data Options

Death Rate Report for North Carolina by County

Colon & Rectum, 2018-2022

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

Sorted by Rate

County
 sort alphabetically by name ascending
2023 Rural-Urban Continuum Codes Φ
 sort by rural urban descending
Met Healthy People Objective of 8.9?
Age-Adjusted Death Rate
deaths per 100,000
(95% Confidence Interval)
 sort by rate ascending
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
North Carolina N/A No 12.7 (12.4, 13.0) N/A 1,619 falling falling trend -1.4 (-1.9, -0.2)
United States N/A No 12.9 (12.8, 12.9) N/A 52,325 falling falling trend -1.2 (-1.7, -0.8)
Washington County Rural No 31.6 (18.3, 50.9) 1 (1, 69) 4 stable stable trend 7.3 (-2.6, 40.6)
Anson County Urban No 23.1 (16.0, 32.6) 2 (1, 66) 7 stable stable trend 2.9 (-1.0, 19.2)
Swain County Rural No 22.6 (13.6, 35.8) 3 (1, 87) 4 stable stable trend 0.7 (-1.1, 3.0)
Richmond County Rural No 20.5 (15.4, 26.9) 4 (1, 59) 11 stable stable trend 19.7 (-2.0, 35.2)
Wayne County Urban No 19.6 (16.4, 23.3) 5 (1, 38) 28 stable stable trend 4.8 (-1.4, 16.5)
Granville County Rural No 19.6 (15.4, 24.8) 6 (1, 53) 15 stable stable trend -0.9 (-2.1, 0.5)
Robeson County Rural No 19.5 (16.3, 23.3) 7 (1, 39) 27 stable stable trend -0.5 (-1.2, 0.4)
Perquimans County Rural No 19.3 (11.6, 31.2) 8 (1, 89) 5 stable stable trend -1.0 (-3.0, 1.2)
Vance County Rural No 18.0 (13.3, 24.0) 9 (1, 79) 10 stable stable trend -1.0 (-2.3, 0.4)
Caswell County Rural No 17.8 (12.0, 25.9) 10 (1, 87) 7 stable stable trend -1.0 (-2.5, 0.6)
Columbus County Rural No 17.7 (13.5, 22.8) 11 (1, 74) 13 stable stable trend -0.9 (-2.0, 0.2)
Scotland County Rural No 17.2 (12.1, 24.0) 12 (1, 86) 8 stable stable trend -1.7 (-3.4, 0.1)
McDowell County Rural No 17.1 (12.8, 22.6) 13 (2, 80) 11 stable stable trend -0.2 (-1.4, 1.0)
Duplin County Rural No 16.8 (12.6, 22.2) 14 (2, 80) 11 stable stable trend 2.7 (-2.2, 21.6)
Macon County Rural No 16.6 (12.3, 22.3) 15 (2, 83) 11 stable stable trend -0.5 (-2.0, 1.0)
Cherokee County Rural No 16.4 (12.0, 22.6) 16 (2, 83) 10 stable stable trend -0.9 (-2.4, 0.7)
Wilson County Rural No 16.2 (12.8, 20.3) 17 (2, 74) 16 stable stable trend -1.2 (-2.4, 0.1)
Sampson County Rural No 16.0 (12.1, 20.8) 18 (3, 81) 12 falling falling trend -1.3 (-2.4, -0.2)
Halifax County Rural No 15.9 (11.9, 21.0) 19 (2, 83) 11 stable stable trend -1.1 (-2.1, 0.0)
Onslow County Urban No 15.9 (13.1, 19.1) 20 (4, 70) 24 falling falling trend -2.2 (-3.3, -1.0)
Person County Urban No 15.9 (11.5, 21.6) 21 (2, 85) 9 falling falling trend -1.7 (-3.2, -0.2)
Bertie County Rural No 15.8 (9.8, 24.9) 22 (1, 90) 5 falling falling trend -3.1 (-4.6, -1.8)
Stokes County Urban No 15.8 (11.5, 21.4) 23 (2, 87) 10 stable stable trend -0.6 (-1.8, 0.9)
Rockingham County Urban No 15.8 (12.9, 19.2) 24 (4, 75) 22 falling falling trend -1.5 (-2.3, -0.7)
Stanly County Rural No 15.7 (12.1, 20.2) 25 (3, 83) 13 stable stable trend 0.6 (-1.2, 6.0)
Beaufort County Rural No 15.7 (11.4, 21.1) 26 (2, 85) 10 falling falling trend -1.4 (-2.7, -0.2)
Hertford County Rural No 15.5 (9.6, 24.0) 27 (1, 90) 5 falling falling trend -2.3 (-3.9, -0.7)
Bladen County Rural No 15.5 (10.7, 22.1) 28 (2, 87) 7 falling falling trend -2.1 (-3.5, -1.0)
Surry County Rural No 15.4 (12.1, 19.5) 29 (3, 80) 16 stable stable trend -0.7 (-2.1, 0.8)
Polk County Rural No 15.4 (9.3, 24.8) 30 (1, 90) 6
*
*
Caldwell County Urban No 15.4 (12.2, 19.2) 31 (5, 80) 17 falling falling trend -1.5 (-2.6, -0.3)
Mitchell County Rural No 15.2 (9.1, 24.9) 32 (1, 90) 4 stable stable trend -1.5 (-3.0, 0.0)
Rutherford County Rural No 15.2 (11.8, 19.3) 33 (4, 82) 15 stable stable trend -1.3 (-2.5, 0.1)
Harnett County Rural No 15.1 (12.2, 18.4) 34 (6, 80) 20 falling falling trend -2.2 (-2.9, -1.4)
Montgomery County Rural No 15.0 (9.9, 22.2) 35 (2, 90) 6 falling falling trend -2.2 (-3.7, -0.6)
Pasquotank County Rural No 15.0 (10.6, 20.7) 36 (3, 88) 8 falling falling trend -2.0 (-3.4, -0.6)
Cleveland County Rural No 14.7 (11.9, 18.1) 37 (6, 80) 20 stable stable trend -0.9 (-2.1, 0.4)
Lee County Rural No 14.7 (11.2, 19.0) 38 (4, 86) 12 stable stable trend -1.7 (-3.3, 0.1)
Lenoir County Rural No 14.6 (10.9, 19.3) 39 (4, 87) 11 falling falling trend -2.0 (-3.2, -0.9)
Edgecombe County Urban No 14.5 (10.7, 19.3) 40 (4, 87) 10 falling falling trend -1.7 (-2.9, -0.7)
Greene County Rural No 14.2 (8.3, 23.0) 41 (1, 90) 4
*
*
Catawba County Urban No 14.2 (11.9, 16.7) 42 (10, 78) 29 falling falling trend -2.1 (-2.9, -1.2)
Wilkes County Rural No 14.0 (10.9, 17.9) 43 (6, 85) 14 falling falling trend -1.5 (-2.7, -0.2)
Alexander County Urban No 14.0 (9.8, 19.6) 44 (3, 89) 8 stable stable trend -1.5 (-3.1, 0.4)
Davidson County Urban No 13.8 (11.7, 16.1) 45 (15, 78) 32 falling falling trend -1.5 (-2.2, -0.7)
Chowan County Rural No 13.7 (8.0, 23.4) 46 (2, 90) 3 falling falling trend -3.1 (-5.3, -1.2)
Martin County Rural No 13.7 (8.2, 21.8) 47 (2, 90) 5 falling falling trend -3.0 (-5.1, -1.2)
Carteret County Rural No 13.6 (10.7, 17.2) 48 (10, 85) 17 falling falling trend -1.6 (-2.7, -0.4)
Burke County Urban No 13.4 (10.6, 16.8) 49 (10, 86) 17 falling falling trend -1.4 (-2.5, -0.2)
Haywood County Rural No 13.3 (10.2, 17.3) 50 (10, 88) 13 stable stable trend 18.7 (-2.0, 34.6)
Brunswick County Urban No 13.2 (11.0, 15.9) 51 (16, 83) 32 falling falling trend -2.5 (-3.5, -1.3)
Randolph County Urban No 13.2 (10.9, 15.8) 52 (16, 83) 25 falling falling trend -1.8 (-2.8, -0.9)
Craven County Rural No 13.1 (10.4, 16.3) 53 (11, 87) 18 falling falling trend -2.5 (-3.8, -1.2)
Gaston County Urban No 13.0 (11.1, 15.0) 54 (22, 81) 37 falling falling trend -1.6 (-2.3, -1.0)
Northampton County Rural No 12.9 (7.6, 21.4) 55 (2, 90) 4 falling falling trend -2.7 (-4.4, -1.2)
Madison County Urban No 12.9 (7.6, 20.8) 56 (2, 90) 4 stable stable trend -1.1 (-2.8, 0.7)
Alamance County Urban No 12.8 (10.8, 15.2) 57 (21, 84) 29 falling falling trend -2.0 (-2.6, -1.3)
Henderson County Urban No 12.6 (10.2, 15.4) 58 (16, 86) 24 falling falling trend -2.2 (-3.3, -1.2)
Pitt County Urban No 12.5 (10.2, 15.1) 59 (20, 86) 23 falling falling trend -2.8 (-3.4, -2.3)
Hoke County Urban No 12.4 (8.0, 18.2) 60 (4, 90) 5 falling falling trend -3.4 (-5.0, -1.7)
Warren County Rural No 12.3 (7.2, 20.5) 61 (3, 90) 4 stable stable trend -2.0 (-4.1, 0.1)
Rowan County Urban No 12.3 (10.2, 14.9) 62 (21, 86) 24 falling falling trend -1.5 (-2.3, -0.6)
Guilford County Urban No 12.2 (11.0, 13.5) 63 (35, 80) 75 falling falling trend -2.4 (-3.1, -1.7)
Cabarrus County Urban No 12.2 (10.2, 14.4) 64 (24, 86) 29 falling falling trend -2.0 (-2.8, -1.0)
Iredell County Urban No 12.0 (10.1, 14.3) 65 (25, 86) 27 falling falling trend -2.3 (-3.0, -1.5)
Moore County Urban No 12.0 (9.6, 14.9) 66 (21, 88) 20 falling falling trend -3.0 (-4.2, -1.9)
Lincoln County Urban No 11.9 (9.3, 15.3) 67 (17, 89) 14 falling falling trend -2.9 (-4.0, -1.7)
Cumberland County Urban No 11.9 (10.2, 13.7) 68 (31, 85) 38 falling falling trend -2.2 (-2.7, -1.6)
Buncombe County Urban No 11.8 (10.3, 13.5) 69 (37, 85) 47 stable stable trend 0.5 (-2.8, 9.4)
Forsyth County Urban No 11.8 (10.4, 13.3) 70 (36, 84) 54 falling falling trend -2.3 (-2.9, -1.7)
Jackson County Rural No 11.6 (8.0, 16.6) 71 (10, 90) 7 stable stable trend -1.2 (-2.7, 0.4)
Durham County Urban No 11.4 (9.8, 13.2) 72 (37, 87) 38 falling falling trend -2.6 (-3.4, -1.9)
Mecklenburg County Urban No 11.4 (10.5, 12.4) 73 (48, 83) 118 falling falling trend -2.6 (-6.5, -2.1)
Ashe County Rural No 11.3 (7.6, 17.0) 74 (12, 90) 6 stable stable trend -1.7 (-3.4, 0.1)
Dare County Rural No 11.3 (7.6, 16.5) 75 (10, 90) 7 stable stable trend -1.5 (-2.9, 0.2)
Pender County Urban No 11.2 (8.1, 15.3) 76 (16, 90) 9 falling falling trend -1.8 (-3.3, -0.2)
Johnston County Urban No 11.1 (9.3, 13.3) 77 (35, 89) 26 falling falling trend -2.0 (-2.9, -0.9)
Union County Urban No 10.8 (9.0, 12.9) 78 (41, 89) 27 falling falling trend -2.6 (-3.3, -1.8)
New Hanover County Urban No 10.7 (9.1, 12.6) 79 (44, 88) 32 stable stable trend 11.6 (-3.1, 22.3)
Davie County Urban No 10.5 (7.2, 15.0) 80 (18, 90) 7 falling falling trend -3.1 (-4.7, -1.4)
Watauga County Rural No 10.5 (6.9, 15.4) 81 (15, 90) 6
*
*
Orange County Urban No 10.1 (8.0, 12.6) 82 (40, 90) 16 falling falling trend -3.0 (-4.0, -2.0)
Yancey County Rural No 10.0 (5.7, 17.2) 83 (10, 90) 3 stable stable trend -1.3 (-3.3, 0.7)
Franklin County Urban No 9.9 (7.1, 13.6) 84 (28, 90) 9 falling falling trend -2.9 (-4.3, -1.4)
Currituck County Urban No 9.9 (5.4, 16.6) 85 (10, 90) 3
*
*
Nash County Urban No 9.5 (7.2, 12.4) 86 (43, 90) 12 falling falling trend -7.6 (-22.2, -3.1)
Wake County Urban No 9.5 (8.7, 10.4) 87 (72, 89) 103 falling falling trend -2.8 (-3.3, -2.1)
Yadkin County Urban Yes 8.5 (5.3, 13.2) 88 (31, 90) 5 falling falling trend -3.8 (-5.8, -2.1)
Chatham County Urban Yes 8.0 (5.9, 10.8) 89 (60, 90) 10 falling falling trend -3.3 (-4.6, -1.8)
Transylvania County Rural Yes 7.8 (4.9, 12.3) 90 (42, 90) 6 falling falling trend -3.6 (-5.1, -2.2)
Alleghany County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Avery County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Camden County Urban ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Clay County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Gates County Urban ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Graham County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Hyde County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Jones County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Pamlico County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Tyrrell County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Notes:
Created by statecancerprofiles.cancer.gov on 10/22/2024 4:05 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