Return to Home Mortality > Table

Death Rates Table

Data Options

Death Rate Report for North Carolina by County

Lung & Bronchus, 2015-2019

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

Sorted by Rate
County
 sort alphabetically by name ascending
Met Healthy People Objective of ***?
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
North Carolina *** 42.0 (41.5, 42.5) N/A 5,325 falling falling trend -5.2 (-7.4, -3.0)
United States *** 36.7 (36.6, 36.8) N/A 146,023 falling falling trend -4.9 (-5.2, -4.5)
Chatham County *** 26.1 (22.1, 30.7) 99 (89, 99) 32 falling falling trend -13.5 (-23.7, -2.0)
Watauga County *** 29.4 (23.6, 36.3) 98 (72, 99) 19 falling falling trend -1.8 (-2.9, -0.6)
Wake County *** 29.5 (27.9, 31.1) 97 (88, 99) 279 falling falling trend -4.6 (-5.6, -3.6)
Avery County *** 29.5 (21.0, 41.0) 96 (47, 99) 8 falling falling trend -2.4 (-3.7, -1.1)
Polk County *** 30.4 (22.6, 40.9) 95 (38, 99) 13 falling falling trend -1.8 (-2.8, -0.8)
Mecklenburg County *** 31.1 (29.5, 32.8) 94 (86, 98) 296 falling falling trend -5.5 (-6.6, -4.3)
Durham County *** 31.8 (29.0, 34.9) 93 (80, 99) 97 falling falling trend -4.9 (-6.0, -3.8)
Orange County *** 32.7 (28.5, 37.2) 92 (72, 99) 48 falling falling trend -3.5 (-4.7, -2.3)
Transylvania County *** 33.1 (27.3, 40.3) 91 (55, 99) 24 falling falling trend -2.0 (-3.0, -1.1)
Perquimans County *** 33.7 (23.9, 47.5) 90 (11, 99) 9 falling falling trend -2.5 (-3.9, -1.1)
Henderson County *** 34.8 (31.3, 38.8) 89 (67, 97) 73 falling falling trend -12.4 (-21.4, -2.2)
Pitt County *** 35.0 (31.1, 39.2) 88 (63, 97) 63 falling falling trend -2.4 (-3.1, -1.8)
Moore County *** 35.6 (31.6, 40.1) 87 (57, 97) 60 falling falling trend -2.4 (-3.4, -1.5)
Anson County *** 35.7 (27.2, 46.3) 86 (18, 99) 12 stable stable trend -14.0 (-26.7, 0.9)
Union County *** 36.0 (32.5, 39.7) 85 (62, 95) 83 falling falling trend -1.9 (-2.6, -1.1)
Clay County *** 36.9 (26.7, 51.7) 84 (8, 99) 9 stable stable trend -1.5 (-2.9, 0.0)
Cabarrus County *** 37.2 (33.6, 41.1) 83 (54, 94) 80 falling falling trend -6.4 (-8.7, -4.1)
Hertford County *** 37.3 (28.7, 48.0) 82 (16, 99) 13 falling falling trend -2.9 (-4.0, -1.8)
Camden County *** 37.4 (24.1, 56.3) 81 (2, 99) 5 stable stable trend 2.7 (-5.5, 11.6)
Alleghany County *** 38.1 (26.8, 54.0) 80 (3, 99) 8 stable stable trend -1.2 (-2.6, 0.3)
Washington County *** 38.2 (27.2, 53.5) 79 (5, 99) 8 falling falling trend -2.1 (-3.8, -0.3)
Montgomery County *** 39.0 (30.8, 49.1) 78 (12, 99) 16 falling falling trend -1.8 (-2.6, -1.0)
Macon County *** 39.0 (32.7, 46.7) 77 (19, 97) 28 stable stable trend -0.6 (-1.6, 0.3)
Buncombe County *** 39.6 (36.7, 42.6) 76 (52, 87) 148 stable stable trend -10.0 (-20.1, 1.5)
Greene County *** 39.6 (29.4, 52.4) 75 (4, 99) 11 stable stable trend -1.0 (-2.3, 0.3)
Northampton County *** 39.6 (30.5, 51.4) 74 (5, 99) 14 falling falling trend -1.5 (-2.6, -0.4)
Guilford County *** 39.9 (37.6, 42.2) 73 (55, 85) 244 falling falling trend -1.9 (-2.2, -1.5)
New Hanover County *** 40.2 (37.0, 43.6) 72 (45, 87) 119 falling falling trend -11.2 (-21.0, -0.3)
Warren County *** 41.1 (32.1, 52.6) 71 (6, 98) 15 falling falling trend -9.8 (-15.0, -4.4)
Duplin County *** 41.7 (35.6, 48.7) 70 (14, 92) 34 falling falling trend -2.1 (-2.9, -1.3)
Hoke County *** 41.9 (33.4, 51.9) 69 (7, 97) 18 falling falling trend -14.0 (-25.1, -1.4)
Brunswick County *** 42.0 (38.2, 46.1) 68 (32, 85) 110 falling falling trend -2.0 (-2.6, -1.4)
Jackson County *** 42.1 (34.7, 50.8) 67 (10, 96) 24 stable stable trend -1.0 (-2.0, 0.0)
Yancey County *** 42.6 (33.1, 54.7) 66 (5, 97) 14 stable stable trend 0.6 (-1.1, 2.4)
Forsyth County *** 42.6 (39.9, 45.4) 65 (37, 80) 195 falling falling trend -3.1 (-4.2, -2.0)
Haywood County *** 42.9 (37.5, 49.1) 64 (16, 89) 47 falling falling trend -2.9 (-4.4, -1.4)
Iredell County *** 43.0 (39.1, 47.2) 63 (27, 83) 93 falling falling trend -1.7 (-2.2, -1.3)
Alexander County *** 43.0 (35.6, 51.8) 62 (5, 94) 24 falling falling trend -4.6 (-7.1, -2.0)
Rutherford County *** 43.4 (37.8, 49.6) 61 (16, 87) 46 falling falling trend -1.1 (-2.0, -0.2)
Wilson County *** 43.5 (38.1, 49.5) 60 (16, 87) 49 falling falling trend -1.5 (-2.1, -0.9)
Catawba County *** 43.5 (39.6, 47.7) 59 (23, 82) 93 falling falling trend -3.7 (-5.7, -1.7)
Person County *** 43.7 (36.3, 52.4) 58 (6, 93) 26 falling falling trend -1.3 (-2.3, -0.2)
Ashe County *** 44.3 (36.4, 54.1) 57 (4, 93) 22 stable stable trend -0.9 (-1.8, 0.0)
Cherokee County *** 44.4 (36.6, 54.0) 56 (4, 93) 25 falling falling trend -1.7 (-2.8, -0.6)
Mitchell County *** 44.6 (34.2, 58.2) 55 (2, 98) 13 stable stable trend -0.7 (-1.7, 0.3)
Stanly County *** 44.7 (38.6, 51.7) 54 (9, 88) 39 falling falling trend -0.9 (-1.7, -0.1)
Martin County *** 45.3 (36.0, 56.8) 53 (2, 95) 17 falling falling trend -2.4 (-3.4, -1.4)
Lenoir County *** 45.6 (39.4, 52.7) 52 (7, 84) 39 falling falling trend -1.1 (-1.9, -0.4)
Columbus County *** 46.1 (39.8, 53.3) 51 (7, 85) 39 falling falling trend -1.5 (-2.2, -0.8)
Franklin County *** 46.1 (39.8, 53.2) 50 (7, 85) 40 falling falling trend -1.3 (-2.0, -0.5)
Edgecombe County *** 46.3 (39.5, 54.0) 49 (5, 85) 35 falling falling trend -1.6 (-2.3, -0.9)
Cleveland County *** 46.3 (41.2, 52.0) 48 (9, 79) 62 falling falling trend -4.4 (-6.9, -1.9)
Burke County *** 46.5 (41.5, 52.0) 47 (10, 80) 64 falling falling trend -5.4 (-8.6, -2.2)
Dare County *** 46.7 (38.7, 56.0) 46 (3, 87) 26 falling falling trend -2.5 (-3.7, -1.4)
Granville County *** 46.8 (40.1, 54.5) 45 (4, 83) 36 falling falling trend -3.9 (-6.2, -1.4)
Gates County *** 46.9 (32.9, 65.7) 44 (1, 99) 8 stable stable trend -1.0 (-2.7, 0.8)
Lee County *** 47.0 (40.3, 54.5) 43 (4, 85) 36 falling falling trend -1.5 (-2.2, -0.8)
Cumberland County *** 47.0 (43.6, 50.6) 42 (15, 68) 147 falling falling trend -2.3 (-2.7, -1.9)
Pamlico County *** 47.0 (35.4, 62.8) 41 (1, 97) 12 falling falling trend -2.1 (-3.3, -0.8)
Halifax County *** 47.3 (40.7, 54.9) 40 (4, 81) 38 falling falling trend -1.2 (-1.9, -0.5)
Lincoln County *** 47.3 (41.7, 53.6) 39 (6, 78) 53 falling falling trend -1.1 (-1.8, -0.3)
Alamance County *** 47.4 (43.3, 51.8) 38 (10, 71) 101 falling falling trend -1.1 (-1.6, -0.6)
Wayne County *** 47.9 (43.0, 53.1) 37 (8, 74) 74 falling falling trend -1.3 (-1.9, -0.8)
Nash County *** 47.9 (42.5, 53.7) 36 (7, 78) 62 falling falling trend -0.9 (-1.4, -0.4)
Pender County *** 48.1 (41.5, 55.5) 35 (4, 82) 40 falling falling trend -1.1 (-1.8, -0.3)
Rowan County *** 48.3 (43.8, 53.1) 34 (8, 70) 90 falling falling trend -7.2 (-11.9, -2.4)
Bertie County *** 48.3 (37.9, 61.3) 33 (1, 92) 16 falling falling trend -2.0 (-3.0, -1.1)
Davie County *** 48.4 (41.2, 56.8) 32 (2, 82) 32 stable stable trend 0.2 (-1.0, 1.4)
Wilkes County *** 48.4 (42.6, 54.9) 31 (4, 80) 52 stable stable trend -0.4 (-1.1, 0.4)
Carteret County *** 48.8 (43.3, 55.0) 30 (5, 73) 60 falling falling trend -1.5 (-2.2, -0.9)
Bladen County *** 48.8 (40.5, 58.5) 29 (2, 85) 26 falling falling trend -1.2 (-2.1, -0.3)
Rockingham County *** 49.0 (43.9, 54.7) 28 (5, 71) 69 falling falling trend -2.6 (-3.8, -1.5)
Caldwell County *** 49.2 (43.7, 55.3) 27 (4, 71) 60 falling falling trend -10.1 (-15.7, -4.1)
Graham County *** 49.2 (34.8, 69.4) 26 (1, 98) 8 falling falling trend -1.8 (-3.4, -0.1)
Chowan County *** 49.4 (37.5, 64.7) 25 (1, 94) 12 stable stable trend -1.0 (-2.2, 0.1)
Beaufort County *** 49.5 (42.8, 57.3) 24 (2, 78) 40 falling falling trend -2.4 (-3.2, -1.6)
Craven County *** 49.6 (44.4, 55.2) 23 (4, 69) 70 falling falling trend -0.9 (-1.5, -0.4)
Pasquotank County *** 49.7 (41.3, 59.4) 22 (1, 83) 26 falling falling trend -0.9 (-1.7, -0.2)
Currituck County *** 49.8 (39.5, 62.2) 21 (1, 91) 18 falling falling trend -1.9 (-3.2, -0.7)
Stokes County *** 50.3 (43.2, 58.5) 20 (2, 77) 36 falling falling trend -1.6 (-2.6, -0.7)
Harnett County *** 50.6 (45.2, 56.5) 19 (3, 65) 66 falling falling trend -1.2 (-1.8, -0.7)
Richmond County *** 50.7 (43.0, 59.6) 18 (1, 79) 32 falling falling trend -3.0 (-5.0, -0.9)
Vance County *** 51.0 (43.2, 59.9) 17 (1, 78) 31 falling falling trend -1.5 (-2.3, -0.7)
McDowell County *** 51.0 (43.5, 59.6) 16 (2, 79) 34 stable stable trend -0.4 (-1.1, 0.2)
Johnston County *** 51.5 (47.1, 56.2) 15 (3, 57) 107 falling falling trend -1.7 (-2.3, -1.1)
Swain County *** 51.5 (38.3, 68.3) 14 (1, 94) 11 stable stable trend -0.2 (-1.6, 1.1)
Madison County *** 53.1 (42.3, 66.2) 13 (1, 87) 18 stable stable trend -3.2 (-6.9, 0.6)
Jones County *** 53.5 (38.1, 74.4) 12 (1, 96) 9 stable stable trend -0.4 (-1.7, 1.0)
Scotland County *** 53.6 (44.7, 63.9) 11 (1, 76) 27 stable stable trend -0.2 (-1.3, 0.8)
Sampson County *** 54.2 (47.4, 61.8) 10 (1, 58) 47 stable stable trend -0.5 (-1.1, 0.1)
Yadkin County *** 54.6 (46.3, 64.3) 9 (1, 70) 31 stable stable trend -0.5 (-1.5, 0.5)
Gaston County *** 55.0 (51.1, 59.2) 8 (2, 36) 152 falling falling trend -1.5 (-2.0, -1.0)
Davidson County *** 55.4 (51.1, 59.9) 7 (1, 35) 128 stable stable trend -0.3 (-0.9, 0.3)
Caswell County *** 56.0 (45.5, 68.6) 6 (1, 75) 21 stable stable trend -1.0 (-2.1, 0.1)
Robeson County *** 56.2 (50.9, 61.8) 5 (1, 38) 88 stable stable trend -0.7 (-1.3, 0.0)
Randolph County *** 58.5 (53.7, 63.7) 4 (1, 24) 113 stable stable trend 0.0 (-0.5, 0.5)
Surry County *** 58.8 (52.4, 65.7) 3 (1, 33) 65 stable stable trend 0.0 (-0.7, 0.7)
Onslow County *** 63.9 (58.0, 70.1) 2 (1, 14) 89 falling falling trend -1.0 (-1.4, -0.6)
Hyde County *** 65.4 (42.0, 99.5) 1 (1, 97) 5
*
*
Tyrrell County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Notes:
Created by statecancerprofiles.cancer.gov on 12/06/2021 10:10 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 2020 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 1969-2018 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.

*** No Healthy People 2020 Objective for this cancer.
Healthy People 2020 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