Return to Home Incidence > Table

Incidence Rates Table

Data Options
Comparison Options

Incidence Rate Report for Minnesota by County

All Cancer Sites (All Stages^), 2018-2022

All Races (includes Hispanic), Both Sexes, Ages <50

Sorted by Recentaapc

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
Minnesota 2 N/A 115.5 (113.8, 117.1) N/A 3,908 stable stable trend 0.8 (-0.5, 1.1)
US (SEER+NPCR) 1 N/A 105.7 (105.5, 105.9) N/A 211,922 stable stable trend 0.1 (-0.1, 0.2)
McLeod County 2 Rural 93.2 (75.6, 113.5) 78 (29, 83) 20 falling falling trend -7.3 (-22.5, -0.4)
Roseau County 2 Rural 91.5 (64.1, 126.4) 79 (9, 83) 7 stable stable trend -7.2 (-31.4, 2.7)
Koochiching County 2 Rural 84.1 (54.3, 124.3) 82 (15, 83) 5 stable stable trend -2.1 (-20.7, 6.7)
Houston County 2 Urban 104.1 (77.7, 136.4) 69 (7, 83) 10 stable stable trend -1.8 (-12.7, 1.5)
Cass County 2 Rural 96.9 (75.2, 122.8) 74 (15, 83) 14 stable stable trend -1.3 (-3.6, 0.6)
Lyon County 2 Rural 102.7 (80.7, 128.7) 72 (13, 83) 15 stable stable trend -1.3 (-10.0, 1.1)
Dodge County 2 Urban 117.9 (92.9, 147.5) 43 (3, 81) 15 stable stable trend -1.2 (-7.7, 0.6)
Rock County 2 Urban 103.8 (68.9, 149.8) 70 (2, 83) 6 stable stable trend -1.0 (-5.4, 3.1)
Swift County 2 Rural 81.0 (50.1, 123.6) 83 (12, 83) 4 stable stable trend -1.0 (-5.6, 2.9)
Nobles County 2 Rural 85.5 (63.7, 112.1) 81 (27, 83) 10 stable stable trend -0.8 (-3.3, 1.6)
Cottonwood County 2 Rural 110.0 (74.6, 155.6) 55 (2, 83) 6 stable stable trend -0.7 (-3.4, 1.7)
Stevens County 2 Rural 114.4 (75.8, 164.8) 49 (1, 83) 6 stable stable trend -0.4 (-3.5, 2.6)
Jackson County 2 Rural 87.1 (55.2, 130.5) 80 (4, 83) 5 stable stable trend -0.3 (-11.2, 3.4)
Steele County 2 Rural 110.8 (91.6, 132.8) 53 (10, 81) 23 stable stable trend -0.3 (-4.6, 1.5)
Aitkin County 2 Rural 105.3 (72.8, 147.4) 67 (3, 83) 7 stable stable trend -0.2 (-3.1, 2.4)
Mower County 2 Rural 103.6 (85.7, 124.1) 68 (14, 82) 24 stable stable trend -0.2 (-1.7, 1.3)
Kanabec County 2 Rural 95.4 (68.7, 129.0) 77 (10, 83) 8 stable stable trend -0.1 (-2.6, 2.3)
Benton County 2 Urban 103.0 (86.2, 122.1) 71 (20, 82) 27 stable stable trend 0.0 (-2.2, 2.2)
Stearns County 2 Urban 109.3 (99.5, 119.9) 56 (23, 74) 91 stable stable trend 0.0 (-0.8, 0.8)
Mille Lacs County 2 Urban 108.3 (86.0, 134.6) 62 (8, 82) 16 stable stable trend 0.2 (-2.5, 2.8)
Pope County 2 Rural 128.7 (90.0, 178.0) 21 (1, 82) 7 stable stable trend 0.2 (-4.1, 4.4)
Chippewa County 2 Rural 107.2 (73.6, 150.2) 64 (2, 83) 7 stable stable trend 0.5 (-3.6, 4.4)
Hennepin County 2 Urban 106.1 (103.0, 109.4) 65 (46, 71) 856 rising rising trend 0.5 (0.2, 0.8)
Carver County 2 Urban 117.7 (106.5, 129.8) 41 (13, 69) 81 stable stable trend 0.6 (-0.9, 2.3)
Goodhue County 2 Rural 121.7 (103.6, 142.1) 35 (5, 74) 32 stable stable trend 0.7 (-1.1, 2.5)
Kandiyohi County 2 Rural 121.2 (101.9, 142.9) 34 (4, 75) 28 stable stable trend 0.7 (-1.6, 3.0)
Ramsey County 2 Urban 107.0 (102.0, 112.2) 63 (43, 72) 354 rising rising trend 0.7 (0.3, 1.2)
Freeborn County 2 Rural 118.9 (96.3, 145.2) 40 (4, 78) 19 stable stable trend 0.8 (-1.4, 3.0)
Le Sueur County 2 Urban 116.4 (94.3, 142.2) 44 (5, 80) 19 stable stable trend 0.8 (-1.3, 2.9)
Pipestone County 2 Rural 128.2 (86.8, 181.7) 23 (1, 83) 6 stable stable trend 0.9 (-2.0, 3.8)
Rice County 2 Rural 110.2 (95.6, 126.3) 54 (15, 78) 42 rising rising trend 0.9 (0.1, 1.7)
Scott County 2 Urban 116.2 (106.9, 126.1) 45 (18, 69) 116 rising rising trend 0.9 (0.2, 1.7)
Becker County 2 Rural 124.9 (102.9, 150.1) 24 (3, 76) 23 stable stable trend 1.0 (-1.5, 3.5)
Blue Earth County 2 Urban 112.4 (97.2, 129.2) 51 (14, 77) 41 stable stable trend 1.0 (-0.4, 2.5)
Olmsted County 2 Urban 152.6 (141.8, 164.0) 4 (1, 19) 150 stable stable trend 1.0 (-0.3, 2.2)
Martin County 2 Rural 128.0 (98.7, 163.0) 17 (1, 79) 13 stable stable trend 1.1 (-1.2, 3.3)
Washington County 2 Urban 124.6 (117.1, 132.5) 27 (12, 51) 204 rising rising trend 1.1 (0.3, 2.0)
Wright County 2 Urban 112.7 (103.1, 122.8) 50 (22, 72) 103 rising rising trend 1.1 (0.2, 2.1)
Anoka County 2 Urban 120.4 (114.0, 127.0) 37 (18, 55) 272 rising rising trend 1.2 (0.7, 1.8)
Faribault County 2 Rural 109.3 (77.7, 149.2) 58 (2, 83) 8 stable stable trend 1.2 (-1.9, 4.3)
Wadena County 2 Rural 96.3 (67.3, 133.2) 76 (6, 83) 7 stable stable trend 1.2 (-1.9, 4.5)
Dakota County 2 Urban 123.1 (117.2, 129.1) 33 (15, 51) 334 rising rising trend 1.3 (0.8, 1.9)
Meeker County 2 Rural 109.4 (85.1, 138.4) 57 (5, 82) 14 stable stable trend 1.3 (-2.3, 4.8)
Morrison County 2 Rural 134.1 (111.4, 159.9) 11 (1, 70) 25 stable stable trend 1.3 (-0.1, 2.7)
St. Louis County 2 Urban 124.9 (115.6, 134.8) 30 (10, 57) 135 rising rising trend 1.3 (0.2, 2.4)
Watonwan County 2 Rural 131.5 (93.0, 180.1) 15 (1, 83) 8 stable stable trend 1.3 (-2.5, 5.2)
Sherburne County 2 Urban 121.2 (109.4, 133.9) 36 (10, 67) 78 rising rising trend 1.4 (0.1, 2.9)
Wabasha County 2 Urban 125.9 (98.1, 159.1) 25 (1, 80) 14 stable stable trend 1.4 (-0.9, 3.6)
Carlton County 2 Urban 99.8 (81.8, 120.5) 73 (20, 83) 22 stable stable trend 1.5 (-0.7, 3.8)
Grant County 2 Rural 133.8 (83.8, 202.5) 10 (1, 83) 4 stable stable trend 1.5 (-1.7, 4.9)
Redwood County 2 Rural 126.2 (93.2, 166.5) 22 (1, 81) 10 stable stable trend 1.5 (-1.8, 4.8)
Sibley County 2 Rural 141.2 (107.1, 182.4) 8 (1, 79) 12 stable stable trend 1.5 (-1.4, 4.5)
Crow Wing County 2 Rural 123.5 (107.4, 141.3) 31 (5, 69) 42 rising rising trend 1.6 (0.3, 2.9)
Polk County 2 Urban 108.9 (87.8, 133.5) 60 (8, 82) 19 stable stable trend 1.6 (-0.2, 3.4)
Nicollet County 2 Urban 132.5 (110.7, 157.1) 14 (2, 70) 26 stable stable trend 1.7 (-0.8, 4.5)
Clay County 2 Urban 128.9 (113.4, 145.8) 19 (4, 64) 51 rising rising trend 1.8 (0.2, 3.5)
Mahnomen County 2 Rural 117.9 (67.0, 190.6) 42 (1, 83) 3 stable stable trend 1.8 (-4.7, 8.1)
Pine County 2 Rural 116.1 (93.8, 142.2) 46 (5, 80) 19 stable stable trend 1.8 (-0.8, 4.5)
Yellow Medicine County 2 Rural 97.2 (62.2, 144.2) 75 (2, 83) 5 stable stable trend 1.8 (-2.5, 5.9)
Todd County 2 Rural 112.5 (87.7, 141.8) 52 (3, 82) 14 stable stable trend 1.9 (-1.3, 5.1)
Brown County 2 Rural 131.3 (105.2, 161.8) 16 (1, 77) 18 rising rising trend 2.0 (0.1, 4.0)
Fillmore County 2 Urban 114.6 (88.4, 146.0) 48 (3, 83) 13 stable stable trend 2.0 (-0.4, 4.4)
Isanti County 2 Urban 121.0 (102.2, 142.3) 38 (4, 76) 29 stable stable trend 2.0 (0.0, 4.2)
Renville County 2 Rural 148.3 (112.3, 192.1) 5 (1, 76) 11 stable stable trend 2.0 (-1.3, 5.3)
Winona County 2 Rural 109.0 (91.3, 128.9) 59 (13, 80) 28 stable stable trend 2.0 (-0.3, 4.3)
Waseca County 2 Rural 128.9 (100.8, 162.3) 20 (1, 78) 14 stable stable trend 2.1 (-0.6, 5.1)
Beltrami County 2 Rural 140.1 (119.6, 163.0) 9 (1, 59) 34 rising rising trend 2.3 (0.9, 3.8)
Douglas County 2 Rural 125.3 (104.5, 149.0) 28 (3, 74) 26 rising rising trend 2.3 (0.2, 4.6)
Marshall County 2 Rural 125.0 (83.6, 179.2) 29 (1, 83) 6 stable stable trend 2.4 (-1.6, 6.5)
Itasca County 2 Rural 142.2 (121.4, 165.6) 7 (1, 59) 33 rising rising trend 2.5 (1.2, 3.9)
Pennington County 2 Rural 124.2 (92.1, 163.7) 32 (1, 82) 10 stable stable trend 2.5 (-1.0, 6.5)
Otter Tail County 2 Rural 133.3 (115.1, 153.4) 12 (2, 63) 39 rising rising trend 2.8 (1.2, 4.3)
Hubbard County 2 Rural 124.0 (95.9, 157.8) 18 (1, 79) 13 rising rising trend 2.9 (0.1, 6.1)
Clearwater County 2 Rural 155.4 (108.2, 215.8) 3 (1, 81) 7 stable stable trend 3.9 (-0.2, 8.6)
Wilkin County 2 Rural 125.6 (78.7, 189.7) 26 (1, 83) 4 rising rising trend 5.7 (1.7, 10.4)
Chisago County 2 Urban 132.1 (115.4, 150.6) 13 (3, 61) 45 rising rising trend 7.9 (2.6, 19.8)
Big Stone County 2 Rural 142.9 (83.0, 228.1) 6 (1, 83) 3
*
*
Lac qui Parle County 2 Rural 106.0 (61.6, 169.4) 66 (1, 83) 3
*
*
Lake County 2 Rural 120.1 (82.7, 168.8) 39 (1, 83) 7
*
*
Lincoln County 2 Rural 116.1 (66.3, 187.6) 47 (1, 83) 3
*
*
Murray County 2 Rural 108.9 (68.2, 164.6) 61 (1, 83) 4
*
*
Norman County 2 Rural 157.5 (103.6, 229.1) 2 (1, 82) 5
*
*
Red Lake County 2 Rural 158.6 (92.2, 254.2) 1 (1, 83) 3
*
*
Cook County 2 Rural
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Kittson County 2 Rural
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Lake of the Woods County 2 Rural
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Traverse County 2 Rural
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*

Notes:
Created by statecancerprofiles.cancer.gov on 03/18/2026 3:03 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.


† 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