Return to Home Mortality > Table

Death Rates Table

Data Options

Death Rate Report for Texas by County

Lung & Bronchus, 2018-2022

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

Sorted by Rate
County
 sort alphabetically by name ascending
2023 Rural-Urban Continuum Codes Φ
 sort by rural urban descending
Met Healthy People Objective of 25.1?
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
Texas N/A No 29.1 (28.8, 29.4) N/A 8,583 falling falling trend -4.2 (-4.7, -3.6)
United States N/A No 32.4 (32.3, 32.5) N/A 136,831 falling falling trend -4.3 (-4.4, -4.1)
Polk County Rural No 70.1 (60.3, 81.1) 1 (1, 14) 45 stable stable trend -0.5 (-1.2, 0.2)
Trinity County Rural No 65.4 (52.4, 81.8) 2 (1, 58) 18 stable stable trend -0.1 (-1.1, 0.9)
Coleman County Rural No 65.1 (48.0, 88.4) 3 (1, 88) 10 stable stable trend 0.1 (-1.1, 1.4)
Real County Rural No 63.4 (37.8, 108.6) 4 (1, 171) 4
*
*
Young County Rural No 56.1 (43.9, 71.1) 5 (1, 101) 15 stable stable trend -0.4 (-1.4, 0.5)
Baylor County Rural No 54.9 (31.3, 93.7) 6 (1, 180) 3
*
*
Cass County Rural No 54.7 (45.6, 65.5) 7 (1, 71) 26 stable stable trend -0.7 (-1.3, 0.0)
Delta County Rural No 54.0 (34.0, 83.6) 8 (1, 172) 5 stable stable trend -1.7 (-3.4, 0.1)
Freestone County Rural No 53.3 (42.2, 67.0) 9 (1, 96) 16 stable stable trend -0.7 (-2.0, 0.7)
Lamar County Rural No 51.9 (44.7, 60.0) 10 (3, 71) 38 falling falling trend -1.3 (-1.9, -0.7)
Palo Pinto County Rural No 51.4 (42.1, 62.5) 11 (2, 95) 22 falling falling trend -1.7 (-2.4, -0.9)
Burleson County Urban No 51.2 (39.9, 65.1) 12 (1, 118) 15 falling falling trend -1.4 (-2.7, -0.1)
Morris County Rural No 51.1 (37.8, 68.5) 13 (1, 136) 10 stable stable trend -0.8 (-2.0, 0.4)
Shelby County Rural No 51.1 (40.7, 63.6) 14 (2, 106) 17 falling falling trend -1.2 (-2.0, -0.3)
Fannin County Rural No 50.9 (42.5, 60.8) 15 (2, 92) 26 stable stable trend -0.9 (-1.8, 0.0)
Red River County Rural No 50.8 (38.0, 67.6) 16 (1, 131) 11 falling falling trend -1.6 (-2.8, -0.3)
Henderson County Rural No 50.5 (45.1, 56.4) 17 (4, 59) 68 falling falling trend -2.4 (-9.8, -1.8)
San Augustine County Rural No 50.3 (34.6, 72.5) 18 (1, 168) 7 stable stable trend -0.6 (-2.1, 1.0)
Newton County Rural No 49.9 (37.1, 66.8) 19 (1, 142) 10 falling falling trend -1.7 (-3.2, -0.2)
Tyler County Rural No 49.9 (39.3, 62.9) 20 (2, 114) 16 falling falling trend -1.8 (-3.1, -0.5)
Aransas County Urban No 49.0 (39.7, 60.3) 21 (2, 116) 22 falling falling trend -2.8 (-9.9, -2.0)
Liberty County Urban No 48.9 (42.6, 55.8) 22 (5, 77) 47 falling falling trend -3.6 (-7.0, -2.6)
San Saba County Rural No 48.7 (30.8, 75.8) 23 (1, 175) 5 stable stable trend 0.8 (-0.8, 2.7)
Cooke County Rural No 48.5 (40.9, 57.3) 24 (3, 95) 30 falling falling trend -1.0 (-1.7, -0.3)
Wise County Urban No 48.2 (41.5, 55.6) 25 (5, 90) 40 stable stable trend -0.9 (-1.7, 0.0)
Hunt County Urban No 47.6 (42.3, 53.4) 26 (6, 78) 61 falling falling trend -1.3 (-1.9, -0.6)
Panola County Rural No 47.5 (37.5, 59.8) 27 (3, 122) 16 falling falling trend -1.2 (-2.3, -0.2)
Wheeler County Rural No 47.5 (28.5, 77.0) 28 (1, 181) 4 stable stable trend -0.5 (-2.9, 1.9)
Orange County Urban No 47.4 (41.7, 53.8) 29 (6, 81) 50 falling falling trend -2.2 (-2.8, -1.5)
Upshur County Urban No 47.2 (39.4, 56.2) 30 (4, 111) 27 falling falling trend -3.1 (-10.4, -1.9)
Marion County Rural No 47.1 (33.5, 66.2) 31 (1, 157) 9 stable stable trend -1.2 (-2.8, 0.3)
Jack County Rural No 47.1 (30.6, 70.0) 32 (1, 174) 5 falling falling trend -2.1 (-4.1, -0.3)
Bosque County Urban No 47.0 (37.4, 59.1) 33 (2, 127) 17 stable stable trend -0.9 (-1.8, 0.1)
Hill County Rural No 47.0 (39.1, 56.1) 34 (4, 107) 26 falling falling trend -3.3 (-16.2, -1.1)
San Jacinto County Urban No 46.7 (38.2, 57.1) 35 (3, 121) 22 falling falling trend -1.6 (-2.5, -0.6)
Coryell County Urban No 46.7 (39.6, 54.5) 36 (4, 100) 32 falling falling trend -2.8 (-4.0, -2.0)
Camp County Rural No 46.5 (32.5, 64.9) 37 (1, 163) 8 falling falling trend -2.6 (-3.8, -1.6)
Nolan County Rural No 46.0 (33.5, 61.9) 38 (1, 150) 9 stable stable trend -1.0 (-2.5, 0.3)
McCulloch County Rural No 45.9 (31.1, 67.2) 39 (1, 172) 6 stable stable trend -1.4 (-3.3, 0.5)
Eastland County Rural No 45.8 (35.3, 59.0) 40 (3, 138) 13 falling falling trend -1.5 (-2.6, -0.5)
Bowie County Urban No 45.8 (40.5, 51.6) 41 (9, 89) 56 falling falling trend -2.9 (-6.6, -2.0)
Anderson County Rural No 45.5 (38.6, 53.4) 42 (6, 108) 31 falling falling trend -4.0 (-6.2, -2.9)
Montague County Rural No 44.9 (35.0, 57.2) 43 (3, 143) 15 falling falling trend -1.5 (-2.6, -0.5)
Jasper County Rural No 44.5 (36.5, 54.1) 44 (5, 122) 22 falling falling trend -2.4 (-3.4, -1.5)
Runnels County Rural No 44.3 (30.6, 63.0) 45 (1, 172) 7 falling falling trend -1.8 (-3.2, -0.6)
Sabine County Rural No 44.2 (32.2, 61.4) 46 (2, 161) 10 stable stable trend -1.5 (-3.1, 0.1)
Madison County Rural No 43.9 (30.5, 61.6) 47 (2, 166) 7 stable stable trend -1.0 (-2.7, 0.6)
Wood County Rural No 43.7 (37.5, 50.9) 48 (9, 109) 38 falling falling trend -1.7 (-2.6, -0.9)
Matagorda County Rural No 43.1 (35.0, 52.7) 49 (5, 132) 20 falling falling trend -3.1 (-13.7, -1.6)
Kaufman County Urban No 42.8 (37.8, 48.3) 50 (15, 102) 57 falling falling trend -2.3 (-2.9, -1.6)
Grayson County Urban No 42.8 (38.6, 47.3) 51 (21, 94) 80 falling falling trend -2.5 (-8.4, -1.8)
Rusk County Urban No 42.4 (35.7, 50.2) 52 (9, 121) 29 falling falling trend -1.3 (-1.9, -0.6)
Mitchell County Rural No 42.3 (26.0, 65.3) 53 (1, 180) 4 falling falling trend -2.7 (-4.4, -1.3)
Harrison County Urban No 42.1 (36.3, 48.6) 54 (15, 112) 39 falling falling trend -5.3 (-14.2, -2.1)
Wichita County Urban No 41.6 (37.1, 46.6) 55 (22, 106) 64 falling falling trend -3.6 (-5.2, -2.8)
Navarro County Rural No 41.4 (34.8, 49.0) 56 (11, 132) 29 falling falling trend -2.1 (-3.0, -1.2)
Robertson County Urban No 41.4 (30.6, 55.2) 57 (3, 164) 10 falling falling trend -1.5 (-2.8, -0.3)
Van Zandt County Rural No 41.3 (35.5, 47.8) 58 (14, 120) 38 falling falling trend -3.4 (-12.2, -1.6)
Franklin County Rural No 41.1 (28.1, 59.0) 59 (2, 173) 7 stable stable trend -1.4 (-2.7, 0.1)
Leon County Rural No 41.0 (31.1, 54.0) 60 (5, 161) 12 falling falling trend -2.3 (-3.5, -1.1)
Hopkins County Rural No 41.0 (33.4, 49.9) 61 (9, 141) 21 falling falling trend -3.4 (-16.4, -1.6)
Blanco County Rural No 40.9 (29.3, 57.1) 62 (3, 167) 9 falling falling trend -2.3 (-3.8, -0.6)
Llano County Rural No 40.7 (31.8, 52.2) 63 (7, 155) 20 falling falling trend -1.8 (-2.7, -0.9)
Ector County Urban No 40.3 (35.4, 45.8) 64 (21, 118) 50 falling falling trend -2.1 (-2.6, -1.6)
Gonzales County Rural No 40.3 (30.1, 53.2) 65 (4, 166) 11 falling falling trend -1.7 (-2.9, -0.5)
Waller County Urban No 40.3 (32.6, 49.3) 66 (9, 146) 20 falling falling trend -2.2 (-3.3, -0.9)
Cherokee County Rural No 40.1 (33.6, 47.7) 67 (15, 136) 28 falling falling trend -2.4 (-3.1, -1.7)
Calhoun County Rural No 39.6 (29.7, 52.2) 68 (5, 164) 11 falling falling trend -2.2 (-3.4, -1.0)
Houston County Rural No 39.5 (31.0, 50.2) 69 (6, 155) 15 falling falling trend -2.5 (-3.8, -1.2)
Live Oak County Rural No 39.5 (26.4, 57.2) 70 (2, 177) 6 falling falling trend -1.5 (-2.9, -0.1)
Hardin County Urban No 39.4 (33.2, 46.5) 71 (20, 133) 30 falling falling trend -2.4 (-3.2, -1.5)
Limestone County Rural No 39.2 (30.1, 50.6) 72 (6, 163) 13 falling falling trend -2.1 (-3.2, -1.2)
Johnson County Urban No 39.1 (35.3, 43.3) 73 (33, 112) 79 falling falling trend -9.3 (-14.6, -3.2)
Gray County Rural No 39.0 (29.0, 51.4) 74 (8, 169) 10 falling falling trend -1.6 (-2.7, -0.6)
Jackson County Rural No 38.8 (28.3, 52.7) 75 (5, 175) 9 falling falling trend -1.8 (-3.1, -0.5)
Jones County Urban No 38.7 (28.1, 52.2) 76 (6, 173) 9 falling falling trend -2.0 (-6.3, -0.7)
Gregg County Urban No 38.7 (34.3, 43.5) 77 (27, 120) 58 falling falling trend -3.4 (-5.3, -2.6)
Karnes County Rural No 38.5 (25.9, 55.1) 78 (4, 177) 6 stable stable trend -0.8 (-2.3, 0.6)
Howard County Rural No 38.3 (29.6, 48.8) 79 (10, 163) 14 falling falling trend -1.6 (-2.6, -0.7)
Parker County Urban No 38.2 (34.2, 42.5) 80 (34, 120) 70 falling falling trend -2.1 (-2.7, -1.4)
Titus County Rural No 37.9 (29.2, 48.6) 81 (11, 163) 13 falling falling trend -2.6 (-4.1, -1.3)
Hamilton County Rural No 37.9 (25.0, 56.9) 82 (3, 181) 6 falling falling trend -4.0 (-23.8, -0.9)
Erath County Rural No 37.8 (30.3, 46.8) 83 (14, 153) 18 falling falling trend -3.0 (-13.0, -1.8)
Angelina County Rural No 37.7 (32.7, 43.3) 84 (33, 132) 41 falling falling trend -2.2 (-2.9, -1.7)
Bell County Urban No 37.6 (34.6, 40.7) 85 (49, 115) 124 falling falling trend -5.3 (-10.5, -2.6)
Nacogdoches County Rural No 37.5 (31.5, 44.4) 86 (21, 142) 28 falling falling trend -4.3 (-10.6, -2.5)
Hood County Rural No 37.4 (32.5, 43.0) 87 (33, 133) 43 falling falling trend -2.7 (-3.2, -2.1)
Brown County Rural No 37.1 (30.3, 45.2) 88 (19, 150) 22 falling falling trend -2.1 (-3.0, -1.1)
Chambers County Urban No 37.0 (29.1, 46.5) 89 (12, 161) 16 falling falling trend -2.5 (-3.6, -1.3)
Haskell County Rural No 36.9 (21.4, 62.3) 90 (1, 181) 3 stable stable trend -0.8 (-2.8, 0.9)
Lampasas County Urban No 36.8 (28.1, 47.8) 91 (11, 166) 12 falling falling trend -2.5 (-3.6, -1.4)
Galveston County Urban No 36.7 (34.1, 39.5) 92 (54, 116) 152 falling falling trend -10.9 (-18.1, -2.8)
Pecos County Rural No 36.2 (23.8, 52.9) 93 (4, 181) 5 falling falling trend -1.9 (-3.5, -0.5)
Potter County Urban No 36.1 (31.5, 41.3) 94 (42, 140) 45 falling falling trend -2.3 (-3.0, -1.7)
Stephens County Rural No 35.8 (22.7, 54.7) 95 (3, 181) 5 falling falling trend -1.9 (-3.3, -0.7)
Ellis County Urban No 35.6 (31.8, 39.6) 96 (54, 138) 70 falling falling trend -3.8 (-8.1, -2.7)
Archer County Urban No 35.1 (22.3, 54.1) 97 (4, 181) 5 falling falling trend -2.4 (-4.1, -0.6)
Milam County Rural No 34.9 (27.1, 44.7) 98 (18, 169) 14 falling falling trend -1.5 (-2.4, -0.5)
Clay County Urban No 34.6 (23.2, 51.1) 99 (6, 180) 6 stable stable trend -1.5 (-3.4, 0.5)
Lee County Rural No 34.3 (24.7, 46.9) 100 (13, 176) 9 stable stable trend -0.9 (-2.4, 0.8)
Lavaca County Rural No 34.3 (26.3, 44.7) 101 (18, 170) 13 falling falling trend -1.1 (-2.2, -0.1)
Rains County Rural No 34.2 (24.1, 48.4) 102 (10, 177) 8 falling falling trend -3.1 (-4.6, -1.6)
Smith County Urban No 34.2 (31.2, 37.3) 103 (66, 135) 103 falling falling trend -5.5 (-11.9, -1.5)
Brazoria County Urban No 34.1 (31.4, 37.0) 104 (69, 134) 123 falling falling trend -3.3 (-5.4, -2.8)
Falls County Urban No 34.1 (24.3, 46.8) 105 (10, 177) 8 falling falling trend -14.3 (-29.9, -1.3)
Bastrop County Urban No 34.0 (29.3, 39.3) 106 (47, 151) 39 falling falling trend -6.3 (-15.0, -3.1)
Burnet County Rural No 34.0 (28.5, 40.4) 107 (41, 159) 29 falling falling trend -2.6 (-3.4, -1.8)
Bandera County Urban No 33.9 (26.6, 43.6) 108 (29, 169) 15 falling falling trend -2.1 (-3.1, -1.1)
Swisher County Rural No 33.7 (19.2, 56.1) 109 (4, 181) 3
*
*
Caldwell County Urban No 33.5 (26.7, 41.6) 110 (32, 168) 17 falling falling trend -2.2 (-3.2, -1.3)
Callahan County Urban No 33.5 (23.2, 47.5) 111 (10, 179) 7 falling falling trend -7.0 (-23.8, -2.6)
Terry County Rural No 33.4 (21.1, 50.7) 112 (6, 181) 5 stable stable trend -1.2 (-3.3, 0.6)
Tom Green County Urban No 33.1 (29.1, 37.6) 113 (61, 152) 49 falling falling trend -2.2 (-2.8, -1.6)
Randall County Urban No 33.0 (29.1, 37.3) 114 (61, 150) 53 falling falling trend -1.4 (-2.1, -0.8)
McLennan County Urban No 33.0 (30.1, 36.1) 115 (73, 141) 98 falling falling trend -4.4 (-5.7, -3.6)
Jefferson County Urban No 32.4 (29.6, 35.5) 116 (79, 144) 99 falling falling trend -5.4 (-12.1, -3.0)
Kerr County Rural No 31.9 (27.2, 37.5) 117 (60, 162) 35 falling falling trend -3.5 (-13.2, -2.1)
Comanche County Rural No 31.7 (21.9, 45.1) 118 (16, 180) 7 falling falling trend -7.9 (-28.3, -2.3)
Andrews County Rural No 31.6 (19.9, 47.4) 119 (9, 181) 5 falling falling trend -1.9 (-3.5, -0.5)
Taylor County Urban No 31.6 (27.8, 35.7) 120 (72, 154) 52 falling falling trend -3.5 (-7.7, -2.6)
Midland County Urban No 31.5 (27.3, 36.1) 121 (68, 156) 43 falling falling trend -2.2 (-2.8, -1.6)
San Patricio County Urban No 31.5 (26.2, 37.6) 122 (58, 167) 25 falling falling trend -5.3 (-8.7, -3.8)
Scurry County Rural No 31.5 (21.2, 45.2) 123 (13, 181) 6 stable stable trend -1.3 (-2.8, 0.2)
Austin County Urban No 31.2 (24.1, 39.9) 124 (39, 173) 14 falling falling trend -1.9 (-2.9, -0.8)
Montgomery County Urban No 31.0 (29.1, 33.0) 125 (98, 144) 207 falling falling trend -4.7 (-6.4, -3.8)
Lamb County Rural No 30.8 (20.2, 45.5) 126 (15, 181) 5 stable stable trend -1.4 (-3.3, 0.2)
Lubbock County Urban No 30.8 (28.0, 33.7) 127 (87, 152) 93 falling falling trend -3.2 (-7.2, -2.2)
Tarrant County Urban No 30.6 (29.5, 31.7) 128 (108, 141) 602 falling falling trend -7.4 (-9.6, -4.2)
Wilbarger County Rural No 30.5 (19.7, 45.6) 129 (13, 181) 5 falling falling trend -1.9 (-3.6, -0.5)
Uvalde County Rural No 30.5 (22.3, 40.9) 130 (30, 178) 9 falling falling trend -3.0 (-4.4, -1.7)
DeWitt County Rural No 30.3 (22.1, 41.0) 131 (28, 178) 9 stable stable trend -0.9 (-2.3, 0.5)
Somervell County Rural No 29.5 (17.9, 47.1) 132 (8, 181) 4 falling falling trend -3.7 (-5.1, -2.4)
Comal County Urban No 29.3 (26.1, 32.7) 133 (95, 160) 65 falling falling trend -2.5 (-7.3, -1.7)
Walker County Rural No 29.2 (24.1, 35.1) 134 (69, 171) 24 falling falling trend -2.8 (-3.7, -2.0)
Gaines County Rural No 29.2 (18.1, 44.0) 135 (12, 181) 5 falling falling trend -2.4 (-4.4, -0.5)
Victoria County Urban No 28.9 (24.5, 33.8) 136 (78, 170) 32 falling falling trend -3.0 (-3.8, -2.2)
Dawson County Rural No 28.8 (17.6, 44.8) 137 (11, 181) 4 falling falling trend -1.7 (-3.5, -0.2)
Dallas County Urban No 28.5 (27.5, 29.5) 138 (122, 150) 656 falling falling trend -4.4 (-6.3, -3.6)
Hale County Rural No 28.4 (21.1, 37.5) 139 (47, 179) 10 stable stable trend -0.8 (-2.2, 0.6)
Rockwall County Urban No 28.3 (23.7, 33.4) 140 (84, 171) 29 falling falling trend -3.6 (-4.3, -2.7)
Wharton County Rural No 28.2 (22.2, 35.4) 141 (66, 177) 16 falling falling trend -4.8 (-15.6, -3.0)
Bee County Rural No 28.2 (20.3, 38.1) 142 (41, 181) 9 falling falling trend -2.5 (-3.8, -1.4)
Guadalupe County Urban No 28.0 (24.8, 31.6) 143 (101, 167) 54 falling falling trend -6.4 (-14.4, -2.4)
Grimes County Rural No 27.9 (21.2, 36.4) 144 (64, 179) 12 falling falling trend -13.4 (-30.7, -2.8)
Goliad County Urban No 27.8 (16.4, 46.7) 145 (12, 181) 4
*
*
Kleberg County Rural No 27.6 (20.1, 37.2) 146 (52, 180) 9 falling falling trend -4.8 (-23.0, -2.8)
Wilson County Urban No 27.5 (22.0, 34.2) 147 (74, 176) 18 falling falling trend -2.9 (-3.9, -1.7)
Hutchinson County Rural No 27.4 (19.3, 38.0) 148 (45, 181) 8 falling falling trend -14.3 (-27.7, -3.1)
Colorado County Rural No 27.1 (19.7, 36.9) 149 (56, 181) 9 stable stable trend -9.3 (-22.6, 3.9)
Atascosa County Urban No 26.6 (20.9, 33.5) 150 (86, 178) 15 falling falling trend -2.9 (-3.9, -1.8)
Hockley County Urban No 26.4 (18.2, 37.3) 151 (44, 181) 7 falling falling trend -2.1 (-3.9, -0.4)
Nueces County Urban No 26.1 (23.9, 28.4) 152 (124, 168) 108 falling falling trend -3.1 (-3.5, -2.7)
Fayette County Rural No 26.1 (19.6, 34.5) 153 (70, 180) 12 falling falling trend -1.8 (-2.9, -0.6)
Medina County Urban No 25.9 (20.6, 32.3) 154 (84, 178) 17 falling falling trend -2.0 (-3.0, -0.9)
Deaf Smith County Rural No 25.8 (16.4, 38.6) 155 (28, 181) 5 stable stable trend -1.7 (-3.5, 0.0)
Reeves County Rural No 25.6 (14.6, 41.5) 156 (24, 181) 3
*
*
Harris County Urban No 25.5 (24.8, 26.3) 157 (140, 162) 1,055 falling falling trend -5.5 (-6.4, -4.9)
Washington County Rural Yes 25.1 (19.7, 31.8) 158 (91, 180) 15 falling falling trend -2.4 (-3.3, -1.4)
Brazos County Urban Yes 25.0 (21.7, 28.6) 159 (117, 174) 43 falling falling trend -5.2 (-11.6, -3.5)
Hays County Urban Yes 25.0 (21.9, 28.3) 160 (120, 173) 52 falling falling trend -2.7 (-3.4, -1.8)
Moore County Rural Yes 24.8 (15.9, 36.9) 161 (46, 181) 5 falling falling trend -2.5 (-4.1, -1.1)
Denton County Urban Yes 24.8 (23.2, 26.5) 162 (137, 169) 194 falling falling trend -4.4 (-6.9, -3.5)
Jim Wells County Rural Yes 24.8 (18.8, 32.3) 163 (90, 181) 12 falling falling trend -2.8 (-3.7, -1.9)
Zapata County Rural Yes 24.7 (14.3, 39.7) 164 (29, 181) 3 stable stable trend -1.1 (-3.5, 1.3)
Kendall County Urban Yes 24.4 (19.4, 30.5) 165 (95, 179) 17 falling falling trend -3.3 (-4.4, -2.2)
Collin County Urban Yes 23.9 (22.4, 25.3) 166 (144, 171) 221 falling falling trend -4.6 (-6.5, -3.6)
Bexar County Urban Yes 23.8 (22.8, 24.8) 167 (147, 170) 457 falling falling trend -4.3 (-7.7, -2.0)
Frio County Rural Yes 23.5 (14.5, 36.1) 168 (49, 181) 4 falling falling trend -2.2 (-3.7, -0.7)
Williamson County Urban Yes 23.4 (21.7, 25.3) 169 (144, 173) 138 falling falling trend -3.6 (-6.1, -3.0)
Brewster County Rural Yes 23.3 (13.0, 39.7) 170 (37, 181) 3
*
*
Travis County Urban Yes 21.4 (20.1, 22.7) 171 (158, 176) 221 falling falling trend -5.1 (-6.5, -4.3)
Gillespie County Rural Yes 21.3 (16.3, 28.1) 172 (112, 181) 13 falling falling trend -6.4 (-18.1, -3.0)
Maverick County Urban Yes 21.2 (15.9, 27.6) 173 (118, 181) 11 stable stable trend -1.5 (-2.9, 0.0)
Val Verde County Rural Yes 21.0 (15.7, 27.5) 174 (116, 181) 11 falling falling trend -3.5 (-16.4, -2.3)
Fort Bend County Urban Yes 20.2 (18.7, 21.8) 175 (161, 178) 148 falling falling trend -4.2 (-8.8, -3.5)
Starr County Rural Yes 18.3 (13.7, 23.9) 176 (141, 181) 11 falling falling trend -1.6 (-2.8, -0.4)
Webb County Urban Yes 17.9 (15.3, 20.7) 177 (164, 181) 36 falling falling trend -1.9 (-2.6, -1.2)
Cameron County Urban Yes 17.7 (15.9, 19.5) 178 (167, 181) 78 falling falling trend -2.7 (-3.2, -2.2)
El Paso County Urban Yes 17.5 (16.3, 18.9) 179 (170, 181) 148 falling falling trend -3.9 (-5.8, -3.3)
Willacy County Rural Yes 16.3 (9.6, 26.0) 180 (119, 181) 4 stable stable trend -2.0 (-4.1, 0.1)
Hidalgo County Urban Yes 15.6 (14.4, 17.0) 181 (174, 181) 120 falling falling trend -4.3 (-9.3, -2.8)
Armstrong County Urban ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Bailey County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Borden County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Briscoe County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Brooks County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Carson County Urban ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Castro County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Childress County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Cochran County Urban ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Coke County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Collingsworth County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Concho County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Cottle County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Crane County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Crockett County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Crosby County Urban ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Culberson County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Dallam County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Dickens County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Dimmit County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Donley County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Duval County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Edwards County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Fisher County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Floyd County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Foard County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Garza County Urban ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Glasscock County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Hall County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Hansford County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Hardeman County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Hartley County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Hemphill County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Hudspeth County Urban ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Irion County Urban ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Jeff Davis County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Jim Hogg County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Kenedy County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Kent County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Kimble County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
King County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Kinney County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Knox County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
La Salle County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Lipscomb County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Loving County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Lynn County Urban ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Martin County Urban ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Mason County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
McMullen County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Menard County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Mills County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Motley County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Ochiltree County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Oldham County Urban ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Parmer County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Presidio County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Reagan County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Refugio County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Roberts County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Schleicher County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Shackelford County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Sherman County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Sterling County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Stonewall County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Sutton County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Terrell County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Throckmorton County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Upton County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Ward County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Winkler County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Yoakum County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Zavala County Rural ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Notes:
Created by statecancerprofiles.cancer.gov on 10/09/2024 9:46 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.

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