Return to Home Mortality > Table

Death Rates Table

Data Options

Death Rate Report for South Carolina by County

All Cancer Sites, 2016-2020

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

Sorted by Rate
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 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
South Carolina No 158.6 (157.3, 160.0) N/A 10,470 falling falling trend -1.6 (-1.7, -1.5)
United States No 149.4 (149.3, 149.6) N/A 599,666 falling falling trend -2.0 (-2.2, -1.8)
Colleton County No 207.8 (190.5, 226.4) 1 (1, 12) 114 stable stable trend -0.3 (-0.8, 0.1)
Chester County No 198.9 (180.5, 218.8) 2 (1, 21) 90 falling falling trend -0.6 (-1.0, -0.3)
Marlboro County No 197.9 (177.1, 220.7) 3 (1, 24) 69 falling falling trend -1.1 (-1.7, -0.4)
Union County No 197.2 (177.9, 218.4) 4 (1, 23) 80 falling falling trend -0.5 (-0.9, -0.1)
Allendale County No 195.8 (160.9, 236.8) 5 (1, 42) 24 falling falling trend -1.2 (-2.0, -0.3)
Hampton County No 195.0 (171.4, 221.3) 6 (1, 33) 52 stable stable trend -0.5 (-1.2, 0.1)
Barnwell County No 192.2 (169.8, 217.1) 7 (1, 34) 57 falling falling trend -0.5 (-0.9, -0.1)
Lee County No 192.0 (167.0, 220.0) 8 (1, 37) 46 falling falling trend -4.3 (-7.6, -1.0)
Laurens County No 191.6 (178.8, 205.1) 9 (1, 20) 177 stable stable trend -0.4 (-0.8, 0.0)
Williamsburg County No 186.9 (169.2, 206.3) 10 (1, 32) 87 stable stable trend -0.5 (-1.0, 0.1)
Sumter County No 179.6 (169.3, 190.4) 11 (4, 27) 236 falling falling trend -1.5 (-2.0, -0.9)
Newberry County No 177.7 (161.8, 194.9) 12 (3, 39) 97 falling falling trend -0.8 (-1.2, -0.4)
Dillon County No 177.2 (158.4, 197.6) 13 (2, 40) 69 falling falling trend -1.3 (-1.9, -0.7)
Cherokee County No 176.3 (162.5, 191.0) 14 (4, 35) 126 falling falling trend -2.0 (-2.7, -1.2)
Abbeville County No 175.1 (156.2, 196.0) 15 (2, 42) 66 falling falling trend -0.7 (-1.3, -0.2)
Chesterfield County No 174.8 (160.1, 190.6) 16 (4, 38) 110 falling falling trend -1.0 (-1.4, -0.6)
Bamberg County No 174.3 (149.5, 202.6) 17 (1, 44) 39 falling falling trend -0.9 (-1.6, -0.3)
Kershaw County No 174.3 (162.0, 187.3) 18 (6, 36) 158 falling falling trend -1.1 (-1.5, -0.8)
Orangeburg County No 172.9 (162.3, 184.1) 19 (7, 35) 212 falling falling trend -1.0 (-1.2, -0.7)
Calhoun County No 172.5 (148.8, 199.7) 20 (2, 44) 41 stable stable trend -0.5 (-1.4, 0.4)
Fairfield County No 172.2 (152.2, 194.5) 21 (3, 43) 59 falling falling trend -1.2 (-1.8, -0.6)
Darlington County No 172.2 (160.1, 185.0) 22 (6, 38) 159 falling falling trend -2.8 (-4.3, -1.3)
Marion County No 172.1 (154.6, 191.2) 23 (3, 41) 76 falling falling trend -1.2 (-1.7, -0.7)
Greenwood County No 168.4 (156.9, 180.7) 24 (9, 39) 165 falling falling trend -1.2 (-1.5, -0.9)
Spartanburg County No 166.9 (161.0, 172.9) 25 (14, 34) 638 falling falling trend -1.6 (-2.1, -1.2)
Richland County No 165.5 (159.8, 171.3) 26 (16, 36) 676 falling falling trend -1.4 (-1.6, -1.2)
Pickens County No 163.6 (154.5, 173.2) 27 (14, 40) 253 falling falling trend -0.9 (-1.1, -0.6)
Horry County No 163.0 (158.0, 168.2) 28 (19, 37) 882 falling falling trend -1.1 (-1.3, -0.9)
Clarendon County No 162.7 (147.1, 179.7) 29 (9, 44) 88 falling falling trend -1.1 (-1.6, -0.6)
Anderson County No 161.6 (154.8, 168.7) 30 (17, 40) 436 falling falling trend -1.4 (-2.4, -0.4)
Florence County No 160.9 (152.4, 169.8) 31 (16, 40) 279 falling falling trend -1.4 (-1.7, -1.1)
McCormick County No 158.8 (133.9, 189.4) 32 (3, 46) 34 falling falling trend -1.9 (-2.5, -1.3)
Aiken County No 158.4 (151.1, 165.9) 33 (19, 41) 379 falling falling trend -1.4 (-1.7, -1.1)
Berkeley County No 158.2 (150.8, 165.9) 34 (20, 42) 366 falling falling trend -1.7 (-1.9, -1.4)
Saluda County No 155.3 (136.2, 176.8) 35 (9, 45) 49 falling falling trend -1.3 (-1.9, -0.7)
Oconee County No 155.2 (145.1, 165.9) 36 (18, 44) 192 falling falling trend -1.1 (-1.5, -0.8)
Dorchester County No 154.9 (146.5, 163.7) 37 (22, 43) 268 falling falling trend -1.9 (-2.3, -1.5)
Lexington County No 154.8 (149.0, 160.9) 38 (26, 42) 552 falling falling trend -1.4 (-1.7, -1.2)
Georgetown County No 154.4 (143.5, 166.1) 39 (19, 44) 174 falling falling trend -1.2 (-1.6, -0.9)
York County No 154.3 (147.9, 160.9) 40 (25, 43) 462 falling falling trend -2.7 (-3.4, -1.9)
Charleston County No 147.8 (142.9, 152.8) 41 (35, 44) 735 falling falling trend -2.6 (-3.4, -1.9)
Greenville County No 144.4 (140.1, 148.8) 42 (38, 45) 885 falling falling trend -3.1 (-4.2, -2.0)
Lancaster County No 143.2 (134.1, 152.7) 43 (33, 45) 198 falling falling trend -1.4 (-1.8, -1.0)
Edgefield County No 135.9 (119.4, 154.2) 44 (29, 46) 52 falling falling trend -2.1 (-2.8, -1.5)
Jasper County No 132.8 (116.5, 150.9) 45 (32, 46) 53 falling falling trend -1.4 (-2.2, -0.5)
Beaufort County Yes 121.2 (115.7, 127.0) 46 (44, 46) 409 falling falling trend -2.4 (-2.9, -1.9)
Notes:
Created by statecancerprofiles.cancer.gov on 12/09/2022 10:53 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.



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