Return to Home Mortality > Table

Death Rates Table

Data Options

Death Rate Report for South Carolina by County

Colon & Rectum, 2018-2022

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

Sorted by Count
County
 sort alphabetically by name ascending
2023 Rural-Urban Continuum Codes Φ
 sort by rural urban descending
Met Healthy People Objective of 74.4?
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 ascending
Recent Trend
Recent 5-Year Trend in Death Rates
(95% Confidence Interval)
 sort by trend descending
South Carolina N/A Yes 13.7 (13.3, 14.1) N/A 901 stable stable trend 1.3 (-1.6, 3.2)
United States N/A Yes 12.9 (12.8, 12.9) N/A 52,325 falling falling trend -1.2 (-1.7, -0.8)
Horry County Urban Yes 13.6 (12.2, 15.2) 30 (16, 39) 76 falling falling trend -1.4 (-2.0, -0.8)
Greenville County Urban Yes 10.3 (9.2, 11.6) 43 (34, 43) 65 falling falling trend -2.6 (-3.2, -1.9)
Richland County Urban Yes 14.3 (12.7, 16.1) 22 (13, 38) 61 falling falling trend -2.1 (-2.7, -1.4)
Spartanburg County Urban Yes 14.5 (12.9, 16.4) 21 (13, 37) 57 falling falling trend -1.8 (-2.3, -1.3)
Charleston County Urban Yes 10.9 (9.6, 12.3) 42 (31, 43) 54 falling falling trend -3.2 (-3.8, -2.6)
Lexington County Urban Yes 13.0 (11.4, 14.9) 34 (17, 42) 47 falling falling trend -2.1 (-2.9, -1.2)
York County Urban Yes 13.7 (11.8, 15.7) 29 (15, 41) 42 falling falling trend -2.2 (-2.9, -1.2)
Anderson County Urban Yes 14.2 (12.3, 16.5) 24 (12, 40) 39 falling falling trend -2.0 (-2.8, -1.2)
Beaufort County Urban Yes 12.0 (10.2, 14.1) 39 (19, 43) 37 falling falling trend -1.9 (-2.7, -0.9)
Aiken County Urban Yes 14.2 (12.1, 16.7) 23 (13, 40) 33 stable stable trend 2.0 (-2.0, 12.7)
Berkeley County Urban Yes 13.7 (11.7, 16.1) 28 (14, 41) 33 falling falling trend -2.1 (-3.2, -0.8)
Dorchester County Urban Yes 13.6 (11.2, 16.4) 31 (13, 42) 24 falling falling trend -2.5 (-3.3, -1.6)
Florence County Urban Yes 13.4 (11.0, 16.2) 32 (14, 43) 23 falling falling trend -4.2 (-11.1, -2.2)
Orangeburg County Rural Yes 20.2 (16.5, 24.6) 10 (1, 23) 23 stable stable trend -0.5 (-1.3, 0.3)
Pickens County Urban Yes 12.6 (10.2, 15.5) 35 (15, 43) 20 falling falling trend -1.9 (-3.0, -0.7)
Sumter County Urban Yes 14.1 (11.3, 17.4) 25 (10, 42) 18 falling falling trend -2.5 (-5.2, -1.8)
Lancaster County Urban Yes 12.6 (10.0, 15.7) 36 (15, 43) 17 falling falling trend -1.3 (-2.3, -0.2)
Laurens County Urban Yes 19.2 (15.2, 24.0) 12 (1, 32) 17 stable stable trend -0.8 (-2.2, 0.7)
Oconee County Rural Yes 12.5 (9.7, 15.9) 37 (13, 43) 16 falling falling trend -2.2 (-3.2, -1.1)
Darlington County Urban Yes 16.0 (12.3, 20.4) 18 (4, 41) 14 stable stable trend -0.9 (-2.0, 0.4)
Georgetown County Rural Yes 11.6 (8.7, 15.4) 40 (15, 43) 13 falling falling trend -2.3 (-3.7, -0.9)
Cherokee County Rural Yes 17.5 (13.2, 22.7) 16 (2, 40) 12 falling falling trend -1.5 (-2.6, -0.3)
Chesterfield County Rural Yes 20.3 (15.4, 26.6) 8 (1, 34) 12 stable stable trend -0.5 (-1.8, 0.9)
Greenwood County Rural Yes 13.8 (10.3, 18.0) 27 (8, 43) 12 falling falling trend -1.5 (-2.6, -0.4)
Newberry County Rural Yes 22.0 (16.3, 29.1) 2 (1, 29) 11 stable stable trend -0.8 (-2.0, 0.4)
Kershaw County Urban Yes 12.2 (9.0, 16.2) 38 (13, 43) 10 falling falling trend -4.1 (-12.9, -2.2)
Williamsburg County Rural Yes 21.5 (15.8, 28.9) 3 (1, 33) 10 stable stable trend -0.2 (-1.4, 1.1)
Colleton County Rural Yes 18.8 (13.7, 25.3) 13 (1, 40) 10 falling falling trend -1.5 (-2.8, -0.1)
Clarendon County Rural Yes 21.0 (14.9, 28.9) 4 (1, 36) 9 stable stable trend -0.4 (-1.4, 0.8)
Marion County Rural Yes 20.4 (14.6, 28.0) 7 (1, 38) 9 stable stable trend -0.9 (-2.7, 0.9)
Union County Urban Yes 20.9 (14.8, 29.0) 5 (1, 37) 8 stable stable trend -0.7 (-2.0, 0.6)
Dillon County Rural Yes 20.2 (14.2, 28.2) 9 (1, 39) 8 stable stable trend -0.6 (-2.1, 1.1)
Chester County Urban Yes 14.5 (9.9, 20.9) 20 (4, 43) 7 falling falling trend -2.0 (-3.4, -0.6)
Marlboro County Rural Yes 18.8 (12.8, 26.8) 14 (1, 42) 7 falling falling trend -1.4 (-2.7, -0.2)
Fairfield County Urban Yes 20.4 (13.2, 30.4) 6 (1, 42) 6 stable stable trend -1.1 (-3.5, 1.4)
Abbeville County Rural Yes 15.4 (9.8, 23.2) 19 (1, 43) 5 stable stable trend -1.6 (-3.5, 0.2)
Jasper County Urban Yes 13.4 (8.5, 20.2) 33 (4, 43) 5
*
*
Calhoun County Urban Yes 22.7 (14.0, 35.5) 1 (1, 42) 5
*
*
Hampton County Rural Yes 20.0 (12.7, 30.4) 11 (1, 43) 5
*
*
Saluda County Urban Yes 16.9 (10.6, 26.2) 17 (1, 43) 5 stable stable trend -1.1 (-2.6, 0.6)
Lee County Rural Yes 17.9 (11.1, 28.1) 15 (1, 43) 4 stable stable trend -0.1 (-1.9, 1.8)
Barnwell County Rural Yes 14.1 (8.6, 22.2) 26 (2, 43) 4
*
*
Edgefield County Urban Yes 11.5 (7.1, 18.2) 41 (7, 43) 4 falling falling trend -2.6 (-4.4, -0.8)
Allendale County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Bamberg County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
McCormick County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Notes:
Created by statecancerprofiles.cancer.gov on 10/09/2024 8:54 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.

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