Return to Home Incidence > Table

Incidence Rates Table

Data Options
Comparison Options

Incidence Rate Report for Wisconsin by County

Pancreas (All Stages^), 2018-2022

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

Sorted by CI*Rank

County
 sort alphabetically by name ascending
2023 Rural-Urban Continuum Codes Φ
 sort by rural urban descending
Age-Adjusted Incidence Rate
cases 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 Incidence Rates
(95% Confidence Interval)
 sort by trend descending
Wisconsin 2 N/A 14.9 (14.5, 15.3) N/A 1,163 rising rising trend 1.5 (1.2, 1.8)
US (SEER+NPCR) 1 N/A 13.7 (13.7, 13.8) N/A 56,905 stable stable trend -0.1 (-0.5, 0.4)
Marquette County 2 Rural 21.9 (14.3, 33.1) 1 (1, 61) 6
*
*
Green Lake County 2 Rural 19.6 (12.9, 29.2) 2 (1, 64) 6
*
*
Juneau County 2 Rural 19.5 (13.7, 27.1) 3 (1, 63) 8 stable stable trend 1.5 (-1.9, 5.4)
Trempealeau County 2 Rural 19.3 (13.4, 27.0) 4 (1, 63) 7 stable stable trend 0.5 (-5.4, 6.8)
Lafayette County 2 Rural 18.2 (11.5, 27.9) 5 (1, 66) 5 stable stable trend 1.5 (-2.7, 6.8)
Adams County 2 Rural 17.8 (12.6, 25.8) 6 (1, 63) 8
*
*
Rusk County 2 Rural 17.4 (9.8, 29.3) 7 (1, 66) 4
*
*
Sauk County 2 Rural 17.3 (13.6, 21.9) 8 (1, 59) 16 stable stable trend -0.1 (-6.1, 2.4)
Ashland County 2 Rural 17.2 (10.4, 27.4) 9 (1, 66) 4
*
*
Douglas County 2 Urban 17.1 (12.7, 22.7) 10 (1, 64) 11 stable stable trend 2.8 (-0.7, 7.2)
Vilas County 2 Rural 17.1 (11.3, 25.5) 11 (1, 65) 7 stable stable trend 1.2 (-3.0, 5.8)
Kewaunee County 2 Urban 17.0 (10.9, 25.9) 12 (1, 66) 5
*
*
Shawano County 2 Rural 17.0 (12.7, 22.4) 13 (1, 62) 11 rising rising trend 5.0 (2.6, 8.4)
Clark County 2 Rural 16.9 (11.8, 23.5) 14 (1, 65) 8 stable stable trend 1.0 (-1.9, 4.3)
Oconto County 2 Urban 16.9 (12.4, 22.6) 15 (1, 64) 11 rising rising trend 3.7 (1.0, 7.3)
Ozaukee County 2 Urban 16.8 (13.9, 20.2) 16 (2, 55) 24 rising rising trend 2.0 (0.5, 3.9)
Fond du Lac County 2 Urban 16.6 (13.6, 20.1) 17 (2, 56) 23 rising rising trend 3.7 (1.1, 7.0)
Chippewa County 2 Urban 16.5 (12.9, 20.9) 18 (1, 61) 15 stable stable trend 0.0 (-2.8, 3.3)
Milwaukee County 2 Urban 16.2 (15.1, 17.4) 19 (7, 38) 168 rising rising trend 1.1 (0.4, 1.9)
Oneida County 2 Rural 16.2 (12.3, 21.5) 20 (1, 63) 12 stable stable trend -0.8 (-4.9, 3.5)
Portage County 2 Rural 16.0 (12.5, 20.4) 21 (2, 62) 14 rising rising trend 4.1 (1.0, 8.3)
Sheboygan County 2 Urban 15.8 (13.2, 18.9) 22 (4, 58) 27 rising rising trend 2.1 (0.2, 4.4)
Jefferson County 2 Rural 15.7 (12.5, 19.5) 23 (2, 61) 18 stable stable trend 0.7 (-2.4, 4.4)
Door County 2 Rural 15.3 (10.7, 21.7) 24 (1, 66) 9 stable stable trend 2.1 (-1.5, 6.8)
Dane County 2 Urban 15.1 (13.7, 16.6) 25 (11, 51) 92 rising rising trend 1.4 (0.4, 2.6)
Walworth County 2 Rural 15.1 (12.3, 18.4) 26 (4, 62) 22 stable stable trend 2.3 (-0.7, 6.1)
Racine County 2 Urban 15.1 (12.9, 17.4) 27 (7, 57) 38 stable stable trend 1.2 (-0.6, 3.3)
Eau Claire County 2 Urban 15.0 (12.1, 18.5) 28 (4, 62) 19 rising rising trend 2.3 (0.2, 4.9)
Iowa County 2 Urban 15.0 (9.5, 22.8) 29 (1, 66) 5 stable stable trend 1.4 (-2.0, 5.5)
Brown County 2 Urban 15.0 (13.1, 17.1) 30 (9, 56) 48 rising rising trend 2.4 (0.3, 4.9)
Waukesha County 2 Urban 14.9 (13.5, 16.4) 31 (12, 53) 88 stable stable trend 1.1 (0.0, 2.4)
Polk County 2 Rural 14.8 (10.9, 19.8) 32 (2, 65) 11
*
*
Grant County 2 Rural 14.7 (10.7, 19.8) 33 (2, 66) 10 stable stable trend 1.7 (-0.5, 4.3)
Calumet County 2 Urban 14.6 (10.7, 19.5) 34 (2, 65) 10 stable stable trend 1.9 (-1.5, 6.6)
Washburn County 2 Rural 14.5 (9.1, 23.3) 35 (1, 66) 5 stable stable trend 1.0 (-2.7, 5.3)
Marinette County 2 Rural 14.4 (10.8, 19.3) 36 (3, 66) 11 stable stable trend 1.0 (-2.5, 5.4)
Waupaca County 2 Rural 14.4 (10.9, 18.8) 37 (4, 65) 12 rising rising trend 3.4 (0.6, 7.0)
Washington County 2 Urban 14.4 (12.0, 17.2) 38 (8, 63) 27 stable stable trend 1.3 (-1.1, 4.2)
Green County 2 Urban 14.3 (10.0, 19.9) 39 (2, 66) 8 stable stable trend -0.3 (-3.6, 3.2)
Waushara County 2 Rural 14.2 (9.3, 21.4) 40 (2, 66) 6 rising rising trend 3.6 (0.9, 6.9)
Crawford County 2 Rural 14.0 (8.6, 22.6) 41 (1, 66) 4 stable stable trend 2.4 (-0.9, 6.6)
Marathon County 2 Urban 14.0 (11.7, 16.6) 42 (10, 63) 27 stable stable trend 1.8 (-0.2, 4.1)
Dunn County 2 Rural 13.9 (9.8, 19.4) 43 (2, 66) 8 stable stable trend -1.2 (-5.4, 3.2)
Kenosha County 2 Urban 13.9 (11.6, 16.4) 44 (11, 63) 29 stable stable trend 1.8 (-0.3, 4.3)
Sawyer County 2 Rural 13.8 (8.8, 21.8) 45 (2, 66) 5
*
*
Burnett County 2 Rural 13.6 (8.3, 22.4) 46 (1, 66) 5 falling falling trend -7.3 (-20.2, -1.7)
Dodge County 2 Rural 13.5 (10.8, 16.9) 47 (7, 65) 17 rising rising trend 2.4 (0.1, 5.1)
Outagamie County 2 Urban 13.5 (11.5, 15.9) 48 (13, 63) 32 stable stable trend 1.2 (-0.2, 2.8)
Winnebago County 2 Urban 13.5 (11.4, 16.0) 49 (12, 64) 29 stable stable trend 0.4 (-1.0, 1.9)
Langlade County 2 Rural 13.5 (8.2, 21.8) 50 (1, 66) 4 stable stable trend -1.5 (-5.2, 2.2)
Rock County 2 Urban 13.5 (11.3, 16.0) 51 (13, 64) 28 stable stable trend -2.3 (-12.6, 1.0)
Price County 2 Rural 13.4 (8.0, 22.9) 52 (1, 66) 4 stable stable trend -1.4 (-6.7, 4.3)
Wood County 2 Rural 13.3 (10.5, 16.8) 53 (9, 66) 16 stable stable trend -0.2 (-2.3, 2.1)
St. Croix County 2 Urban 13.3 (10.3, 16.9) 54 (9, 66) 14 stable stable trend 0.0 (-2.8, 3.4)
Columbia County 2 Urban 13.1 (9.8, 17.2) 55 (7, 66) 11 stable stable trend -0.8 (-3.4, 2.0)
Vernon County 2 Urban 13.0 (8.7, 19.1) 56 (3, 66) 6 stable stable trend 2.6 (-0.5, 6.3)
Richland County 2 Rural 12.8 (7.3, 21.5) 57 (1, 66) 4
*
*
Manitowoc County 2 Rural 12.5 (9.8, 15.9) 58 (13, 66) 16 stable stable trend -0.8 (-2.7, 1.1)
Pierce County 2 Urban 12.5 (8.3, 18.1) 59 (5, 66) 6 stable stable trend 2.3 (-1.5, 7.5)
Barron County 2 Rural 12.1 (8.8, 16.4) 60 (10, 66) 9 stable stable trend 0.6 (-2.8, 4.3)
Taylor County 2 Rural 11.9 (6.9, 19.6) 61 (3, 66) 4
*
*
La Crosse County 2 Urban 11.6 (9.3, 14.4) 62 (25, 66) 18 stable stable trend 0.3 (-1.5, 2.2)
Jackson County 2 Rural 11.4 (6.7, 18.6) 63 (3, 66) 4 stable stable trend -0.1 (-4.3, 4.8)
Monroe County 2 Rural 11.0 (7.5, 15.7) 64 (13, 66) 7 stable stable trend 0.6 (-2.8, 4.4)
Lincoln County 2 Rural 10.9 (7.1, 16.5) 65 (10, 66) 5 stable stable trend -0.9 (-3.3, 1.7)
Bayfield County 2 Rural 10.6 (6.2, 18.6) 66 (7, 66) 4
*
*
Buffalo County 2 Rural
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Florence County 2 Rural
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Forest County 2 Rural
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Iron County 2 Rural
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Menominee County 2 Rural
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Pepin County 2 Rural
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*

Notes:
Created by statecancerprofiles.cancer.gov on 03/17/2026 5:25 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.


† Incidence rates (cases per 100,000 population per year) are age-adjusted to the 2000 US standard population (SEER areas use 20 age groups and NPCR areas use 19 age groups). Rates are for invasive cancer only (except for bladder cancer which is invasive and in situ) or unless otherwise specified. Rates calculated using SEER*Stat. Population counts for denominators are based on Census populations as modified by NCI. The US Population Data File is used for SEER and NPCR incidence rates.

‡ Incidence data come from different sources. 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.

Rates and trends are computed using different standards for malignancy. For more information see malignant.html.

^ All Stages refers to any stage. Due to changes in stage coding, Combined Summary Stage with Expanded Regional Codes (2004+) is used for data from Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) databases and Merged Summary Stage is used for data from National Program of Cancer Registries databases. Due to the increased complexity with staging, other staging variables maybe used if necessary.

⋔ 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. The rates used in CI*Rank are all age-adjusted to the 2000 US standard population using 19 age groups for SEER and NPCR areas. More information about methodology can be found on the CI*Rank website.

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.

Φ Rural–urban county classifications are based on the 2023 USDA Rural–Urban Continuum Codes (except for Connecticut Counties which use 2013 codes). State-level cancer rates for rural areas are calculated using cancer cases registered exclusively in rural counties, while state-level cancer rates for urban areas are calculated using cases registered exclusively in urban counties.

1 Source: National Program of Cancer Registries and Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results SEER*Stat Database - United States Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and National Cancer Institute. Based on the 2024 submission.

2 Source: National Program of Cancer Registries SEER*Stat Database - United States Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (based on the 2024 submission).

* 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.

Data for United States does not include Puerto Rico.

Return to Top