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), Female, All Ages

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
South Carolina No 132.4 (130.7, 134.1) N/A 4,784 falling falling trend -1.4 (-1.6, -1.2)
United States No 128.7 (128.5, 129.0) N/A 283,896 falling falling trend -1.9 (-2.2, -1.7)
Pickens County No 138.0 (126.5, 150.3) 24 (7, 42) 113 rising rising trend 1.8 (0.1, 3.5)
Calhoun County No 159.1 (128.5, 196.2) 7 (1, 44) 21 stable stable trend 0.5 (-0.8, 1.8)
Marlboro County No 174.8 (148.1, 205.5) 2 (1, 27) 33 stable stable trend 0.2 (-0.8, 1.1)
Colleton County No 177.3 (155.5, 201.6) 1 (1, 15) 51 stable stable trend 0.1 (-0.5, 0.8)
Lee County No 143.8 (113.7, 180.2) 16 (1, 46) 18 stable stable trend 0.1 (-1.1, 1.3)
Williamsburg County No 139.6 (119.1, 163.0) 21 (3, 45) 36 stable stable trend 0.1 (-0.8, 0.9)
Laurens County No 161.1 (145.1, 178.5) 6 (1, 24) 80 stable stable trend -0.1 (-0.5, 0.3)
Abbeville County No 149.1 (125.3, 176.7) 10 (1, 44) 31 stable stable trend -0.2 (-1.0, 0.5)
Barnwell County No 161.5 (133.9, 193.8) 5 (1, 42) 26 stable stable trend -0.3 (-1.1, 0.6)
Newberry County No 149.9 (129.9, 172.5) 9 (1, 41) 44 stable stable trend -0.3 (-0.8, 0.2)
Bamberg County No 143.3 (113.3, 180.1) 17 (1, 46) 18 stable stable trend -0.4 (-1.7, 0.8)
Chester County No 154.2 (132.8, 178.6) 8 (1, 41) 39 stable stable trend -0.4 (-1.2, 0.3)
Cherokee County No 141.0 (124.3, 159.4) 18 (3, 43) 54 stable stable trend -0.5 (-1.2, 0.3)
Hampton County No 163.4 (134.4, 197.7) 3 (1, 41) 24 stable stable trend -0.5 (-1.6, 0.5)
Orangeburg County No 145.8 (132.7, 159.9) 12 (4, 37) 100 falling falling trend -0.6 (-1.0, -0.2)
Union County No 139.2 (117.7, 164.1) 22 (2, 45) 32 stable stable trend -0.6 (-1.3, 0.1)
Chesterfield County No 144.9 (126.8, 165.1) 13 (2, 43) 49 stable stable trend -0.7 (-1.4, 0.0)
Kershaw County No 144.8 (129.8, 161.4) 14 (3, 41) 71 falling falling trend -0.7 (-1.3, -0.2)
Sumter County No 144.7 (132.4, 158.0) 15 (4, 37) 106 falling falling trend -0.7 (-1.2, -0.2)
Darlington County No 147.6 (132.7, 163.8) 11 (3, 37) 77 falling falling trend -0.8 (-1.2, -0.4)
Georgetown County No 125.9 (112.7, 140.6) 38 (13, 45) 77 falling falling trend -0.8 (-1.2, -0.3)
Horry County No 138.8 (132.5, 145.5) 23 (10, 34) 401 falling falling trend -0.8 (-1.0, -0.5)
Saluda County No 125.9 (102.6, 153.9) 40 (5, 46) 21 stable stable trend -0.8 (-1.6, 0.1)
Aiken County No 133.5 (124.4, 143.0) 30 (12, 42) 175 falling falling trend -0.9 (-1.4, -0.5)
Lancaster County No 123.4 (112.0, 135.8) 42 (19, 45) 92 falling falling trend -0.9 (-1.3, -0.4)
Marion County No 140.6 (119.9, 164.4) 20 (2, 44) 36 falling falling trend -0.9 (-1.4, -0.3)
Spartanburg County No 137.3 (130.2, 144.8) 25 (10, 37) 288 falling falling trend -0.9 (-1.2, -0.6)
Greenville County No 125.7 (120.3, 131.3) 41 (25, 44) 425 falling falling trend -1.0 (-1.3, -0.7)
Dillon County No 134.7 (113.2, 159.5) 27 (3, 45) 29 falling falling trend -1.1 (-1.9, -0.2)
Florence County No 130.3 (120.2, 141.0) 33 (13, 44) 129 falling falling trend -1.1 (-1.5, -0.7)
Greenwood County No 128.4 (115.0, 143.1) 36 (11, 45) 71 falling falling trend -1.2 (-1.6, -0.7)
Jasper County Yes 104.9 (85.5, 127.8) 45 (22, 46) 22 falling falling trend -1.2 (-2.2, -0.1)
Lexington County No 130.3 (123.1, 137.8) 32 (17, 43) 255 falling falling trend -1.2 (-1.5, -0.8)
McCormick County No 161.8 (123.7, 213.8) 4 (1, 45) 16 stable stable trend -1.2 (-2.4, 0.0)
Berkeley County No 133.6 (124.5, 143.3) 29 (11, 42) 169 falling falling trend -1.3 (-1.7, -1.0)
Dorchester County No 128.9 (118.7, 139.7) 35 (14, 44) 124 falling falling trend -1.3 (-1.9, -0.7)
Richland County No 140.7 (133.8, 147.8) 19 (8, 33) 327 falling falling trend -1.3 (-1.6, -1.0)
Clarendon County No 125.9 (107.0, 147.8) 39 (7, 46) 36 falling falling trend -1.5 (-2.1, -0.8)
Fairfield County No 134.3 (110.1, 163.1) 28 (2, 46) 24 falling falling trend -1.5 (-2.4, -0.6)
Allendale County No 137.1 (98.9, 187.8) 26 (1, 46) 9 falling falling trend -1.6 (-2.7, -0.4)
Edgefield County Yes 110.5 (90.2, 134.9) 44 (15, 46) 22 falling falling trend -1.7 (-2.7, -0.7)
Beaufort County Yes 103.6 (96.5, 111.3) 46 (42, 46) 182 falling falling trend -2.0 (-2.4, -1.5)
Anderson County No 132.6 (124.2, 141.4) 31 (13, 42) 195 falling falling trend -2.5 (-3.6, -1.4)
Charleston County Yes 121.5 (115.6, 127.7) 43 (30, 45) 334 falling falling trend -2.8 (-4.0, -1.6)
Oconee County No 127.4 (114.8, 141.1) 37 (12, 45) 84 stable stable trend -6.8 (-16.4, 3.8)
York County No 129.8 (122.0, 137.9) 34 (16, 43) 217 falling falling trend -7.7 (-13.8, -1.2)
Notes:
Created by statecancerprofiles.cancer.gov on 06/18/2024 1:25 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.


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