Return to Home Mortality > Table

Death Rates Table

Data Options

Death Rate Report for Tennessee by County

Pancreas, 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
Tennessee *** 11.1 (10.7, 11.4) N/A 921 stable stable trend 0.1 (-0.1, 0.2)
United States *** 11.1 (11.0, 11.1) N/A 43,836 rising rising trend 0.3 (0.2, 0.3)
Roane County *** 8.2 (5.7, 11.6) 70 (23, 70) 7 stable stable trend -0.4 (-2.0, 1.3)
Anderson County *** 8.6 (6.4, 11.5) 69 (21, 70) 10 stable stable trend -0.6 (-2.2, 1.0)
White County *** 8.6 (5.0, 14.2) 68 (9, 70) 3
*
*
Williamson County *** 8.7 (7.0, 10.6) 67 (34, 70) 21 stable stable trend -1.2 (-2.3, 0.0)
Greene County *** 8.8 (6.4, 11.8) 66 (20, 70) 10 falling falling trend -1.7 (-3.0, -0.4)
Lincoln County *** 8.9 (5.6, 13.7) 65 (8, 70) 5 stable stable trend 0.4 (-1.9, 2.7)
Jefferson County *** 8.9 (6.2, 12.6) 64 (15, 70) 7 stable stable trend -1.3 (-3.1, 0.5)
Sevier County *** 9.1 (6.9, 11.8) 63 (20, 70) 12 stable stable trend -0.1 (-1.6, 1.4)
Bradley County *** 9.1 (7.0, 11.7) 62 (22, 70) 13 stable stable trend -0.2 (-1.5, 1.2)
Campbell County *** 9.1 (6.0, 13.5) 61 (9, 70) 6 stable stable trend 0.1 (-1.6, 1.9)
Blount County *** 9.1 (7.3, 11.3) 60 (24, 70) 18 stable stable trend -0.7 (-1.8, 0.4)
Weakley County *** 9.3 (5.7, 14.5) 59 (6, 70) 4 stable stable trend 0.6 (-1.4, 2.8)
Rutherford County *** 9.5 (7.9, 11.4) 58 (24, 69) 27 falling falling trend -1.2 (-1.9, -0.5)
Cocke County *** 9.6 (6.3, 14.3) 57 (8, 70) 6
*
*
Sullivan County *** 9.8 (8.1, 11.8) 56 (21, 69) 24 stable stable trend 0.3 (-0.7, 1.4)
Robertson County *** 10.0 (7.1, 13.8) 55 (9, 70) 8 stable stable trend -0.5 (-2.2, 1.2)
Warren County *** 10.0 (6.6, 14.8) 54 (5, 70) 5 stable stable trend 1.3 (-1.0, 3.6)
Hardin County *** 10.1 (6.3, 15.8) 53 (4, 70) 4
*
*
Wilson County *** 10.1 (7.9, 12.6) 52 (15, 69) 16 stable stable trend 0.1 (-1.3, 1.4)
Washington County *** 10.1 (8.1, 12.6) 51 (16, 69) 18 stable stable trend 0.2 (-1.1, 1.4)
Henderson County *** 10.2 (6.1, 16.4) 50 (3, 70) 4 stable stable trend -0.7 (-2.5, 1.1)
Cumberland County *** 10.6 (7.9, 14.1) 49 (8, 70) 12 stable stable trend -0.8 (-2.4, 0.9)
Hawkins County *** 10.7 (7.8, 14.5) 48 (6, 70) 9 stable stable trend 0.8 (-1.0, 2.5)
McMinn County *** 10.8 (7.8, 14.7) 47 (6, 70) 9 stable stable trend -0.5 (-1.9, 0.9)
Dyer County *** 10.8 (6.9, 16.3) 46 (3, 70) 5 stable stable trend -1.1 (-2.8, 0.6)
Lawrence County *** 10.9 (7.6, 15.5) 45 (4, 70) 7
*
*
Overton County *** 11.0 (6.3, 18.2) 44 (2, 70) 3
*
*
Carter County *** 11.0 (8.1, 14.8) 43 (5, 70) 10 stable stable trend -0.8 (-2.0, 0.5)
Shelby County *** 11.1 (10.2, 12.1) 42 (21, 54) 110 falling falling trend -2.9 (-4.5, -1.3)
Maury County *** 11.1 (8.5, 14.3) 41 (8, 68) 13 stable stable trend 0.2 (-1.2, 1.6)
Hamblen County *** 11.1 (8.2, 14.9) 40 (6, 70) 10 stable stable trend -0.7 (-2.5, 1.1)
Coffee County *** 11.2 (7.9, 15.5) 39 (4, 70) 8 stable stable trend 0.3 (-1.5, 2.2)
Fayette County *** 11.4 (7.7, 16.3) 38 (3, 70) 7
*
*
Marshall County *** 11.4 (7.1, 17.5) 37 (1, 70) 5 stable stable trend -0.7 (-2.6, 1.3)
Hamilton County *** 11.4 (10.1, 12.9) 36 (15, 56) 55 stable stable trend -0.1 (-0.7, 0.5)
Hardeman County *** 11.5 (6.9, 18.4) 35 (1, 70) 4 stable stable trend -0.2 (-2.4, 2.0)
Sumner County *** 11.5 (9.6, 13.7) 34 (10, 62) 26 stable stable trend 0.8 (-0.3, 2.0)
Davidson County *** 11.6 (10.4, 12.8) 33 (15, 52) 77 stable stable trend 0.3 (-0.2, 0.7)
Giles County *** 11.7 (7.1, 18.2) 32 (1, 70) 4
*
*
Putnam County *** 11.8 (8.9, 15.4) 31 (5, 68) 11 stable stable trend 1.2 (-0.3, 2.8)
Loudon County *** 11.8 (8.8, 15.8) 30 (4, 68) 11 stable stable trend 1.3 (-0.3, 3.0)
Knox County *** 11.8 (10.6, 13.2) 29 (13, 51) 66 stable stable trend 0.5 (-0.2, 1.1)
Hickman County *** 11.9 (7.0, 19.3) 28 (1, 70) 4
*
*
Polk County *** 12.0 (6.8, 20.5) 27 (1, 70) 3
*
*
Claiborne County *** 12.0 (7.7, 18.2) 26 (1, 70) 5
*
*
Lauderdale County *** 12.3 (7.4, 19.3) 25 (1, 70) 4 stable stable trend 1.1 (-0.8, 3.0)
Henry County *** 12.4 (8.5, 17.8) 24 (2, 70) 7 stable stable trend 0.8 (-0.9, 2.5)
Tipton County *** 12.4 (8.8, 17.0) 23 (2, 69) 8
*
*
Cheatham County *** 12.5 (8.3, 18.1) 22 (1, 70) 6
*
*
Haywood County *** 12.6 (7.1, 21.2) 21 (1, 70) 3
*
*
Madison County *** 12.6 (9.9, 16.0) 20 (3, 63) 15 stable stable trend 0.1 (-1.1, 1.3)
Bedford County *** 12.8 (8.8, 17.9) 19 (1, 70) 7
*
*
Carroll County *** 12.9 (8.5, 19.1) 18 (1, 70) 6 stable stable trend 0.4 (-1.2, 2.0)
DeKalb County *** 13.1 (7.5, 21.5) 17 (1, 70) 3
*
*
Smith County *** 13.2 (7.7, 21.5) 16 (1, 70) 4
*
*
Gibson County *** 13.3 (9.5, 18.2) 15 (1, 67) 8 rising rising trend 3.2 (0.9, 5.4)
Dickson County *** 13.4 (9.6, 18.2) 14 (1, 67) 9
*
*
Franklin County *** 13.7 (9.7, 19.0) 13 (1, 68) 8 stable stable trend -0.1 (-1.7, 1.5)
Montgomery County *** 13.8 (11.1, 16.8) 12 (2, 52) 20 rising rising trend 2.6 (0.6, 4.7)
Grainger County *** 13.9 (8.8, 21.4) 11 (1, 70) 5
*
*
Rhea County *** 14.1 (9.6, 20.2) 10 (1, 69) 6 stable stable trend 1.0 (-1.3, 3.3)
Fentress County *** 14.2 (8.4, 23.0) 9 (1, 70) 4
*
*
Marion County *** 14.8 (9.8, 21.7) 8 (1, 68) 6
*
*
Benton County *** 14.8 (9.0, 23.9) 7 (1, 70) 4
*
*
Monroe County *** 16.2 (12.1, 21.6) 6 (1, 52) 11 stable stable trend 0.2 (-1.7, 2.2)
Grundy County *** 16.3 (9.1, 27.5) 5 (1, 70) 3
*
*
Obion County *** 16.3 (11.3, 23.1) 4 (1, 61) 7 stable stable trend 0.9 (-0.8, 2.7)
Union County *** 16.4 (10.0, 25.7) 3 (1, 69) 4
*
*
Johnson County *** 17.9 (11.6, 27.2) 2 (1, 65) 5
*
*
McNairy County *** 18.9 (13.1, 26.7) 1 (1, 51) 7 rising rising trend 1.9 (0.1, 3.7)
Bledsoe County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Cannon County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Chester County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Clay County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Crockett County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Decatur County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Hancock County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Houston County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Humphreys County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Jackson County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Lake County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Lewis County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Macon County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Meigs County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Moore County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Morgan County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Perry County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Pickett County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Scott County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Sequatchie County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Stewart County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Trousdale County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Unicoi County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Van Buren County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Wayne County ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Notes:
Created by statecancerprofiles.cancer.gov on 10/26/2021 2:29 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