Return to Home Incidence > Table

Incidence Rates Table

Data Options

Incidence Rate Report for Oklahoma by County

Colon & Rectum (All Stages^), 2016-2020

All Races (includes Hispanic), Both Sexes, Ages 65+

Sorted by Rate
County
 sort alphabetically by name ascending
Age-Adjusted Incidence Rate
cases 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 Incidence Rates
(95% Confidence Interval)
 sort by trend descending
Oklahoma 6 168.3 (163.7, 173.0) N/A 1,026 falling falling trend -3.0 (-3.3, -2.7)
US (SEER+NPCR) 1 156.6 (156.1, 157.1) N/A 77,629 falling falling trend -2.8 (-3.1, -2.5)
Kay County 6 272.4 (224.5, 327.5) 1 (1, 20) 23 stable stable trend 4.9 (-2.8, 19.8)
Pontotoc County 6 256.7 (203.6, 319.4) 2 (1, 29) 16 stable stable trend 1.3 (-14.7, 22.6)
Pawnee County 6 243.0 (171.5, 334.6) 3 (1, 54) 8 stable stable trend -2.1 (-5.7, 1.4)
Kiowa County 6 238.1 (142.8, 372.1) 4 (1, 58) 4 stable stable trend -5.8 (-42.8, 6.0)
Nowata County 6 232.3 (147.0, 348.8) 5 (1, 57) 5 stable stable trend 0.0 (-6.4, 7.3)
Okfuskee County 6 228.6 (146.1, 341.2) 6 (1, 58) 5 stable stable trend -1.9 (-7.4, 3.5)
Okmulgee County 6 225.8 (178.8, 281.3) 7 (1, 43) 16 stable stable trend -0.8 (-3.1, 1.7)
Texas County 6 224.7 (143.2, 335.4) 8 (1, 58) 5 stable stable trend -0.8 (-5.1, 3.7)
Blaine County 6 223.0 (137.6, 342.0) 9 (1, 58) 4
*
*
Woods County 6 221.8 (126.2, 359.7) 10 (1, 58) 3 stable stable trend -2.9 (-9.1, 2.8)
Choctaw County 6 221.1 (151.8, 311.2) 11 (1, 57) 7 stable stable trend -1.7 (-4.1, 0.8)
Creek County 6 220.3 (184.7, 260.8) 12 (2, 36) 27 falling falling trend -3.2 (-5.2, -1.2)
Atoka County 6 218.5 (146.0, 314.4) 13 (1, 57) 6 stable stable trend -1.0 (-5.1, 3.6)
Garvin County 6 213.7 (159.4, 280.5) 14 (1, 54) 10 stable stable trend -1.6 (-5.8, 2.7)
Caddo County 6 210.9 (156.8, 277.7) 15 (1, 55) 10 stable stable trend -0.2 (-4.0, 3.9)
Craig County 6 208.1 (139.3, 299.1) 16 (1, 58) 6 stable stable trend -2.5 (-6.4, 1.5)
Beckham County 6 207.4 (140.9, 294.3) 17 (1, 58) 6
*
*
Latimer County 6 206.0 (130.2, 309.5) 18 (1, 58) 5
*
*
Kingfisher County 6 198.5 (128.1, 293.6) 19 (1, 58) 5 stable stable trend 2.5 (-1.8, 19.5)
Sequoyah County 6 198.1 (155.4, 249.0) 20 (3, 54) 15 stable stable trend 0.2 (-3.9, 5.7)
Custer County 6 194.8 (136.8, 268.8) 21 (1, 57) 7 stable stable trend -2.1 (-6.6, 2.2)
Adair County 6 191.0 (130.0, 270.9) 22 (1, 58) 6 stable stable trend -2.5 (-8.2, 4.0)
Muskogee County 6 185.8 (151.9, 225.1) 23 (6, 54) 21 stable stable trend -2.3 (-5.4, 0.6)
Mayes County 6 185.7 (144.0, 235.7) 24 (4, 56) 14 falling falling trend -4.0 (-5.9, -2.1)
Comanche County 6 185.4 (155.7, 219.1) 25 (7, 51) 28 falling falling trend -1.7 (-3.3, -0.1)
Woodward County 6 183.3 (122.7, 263.5) 26 (1, 58) 6 falling falling trend -4.3 (-8.6, -0.5)
McCurtain County 6 182.8 (137.1, 238.9) 27 (3, 57) 11 stable stable trend -1.6 (-5.9, 2.8)
Cherokee County 6 174.3 (134.8, 221.8) 28 (7, 57) 13 stable stable trend -2.2 (-5.4, 1.1)
Osage County 6 174.1 (138.2, 216.7) 29 (8, 57) 16 stable stable trend 0.0 (-2.8, 3.5)
Stephens County 6 172.6 (135.4, 217.0) 30 (6, 57) 15 falling falling trend -3.9 (-6.9, -1.2)
Haskell County 6 169.5 (104.5, 259.8) 31 (2, 58) 4 stable stable trend -1.2 (-5.2, 3.2)
Bryan County 6 169.4 (131.9, 214.3) 32 (7, 57) 14 stable stable trend -2.0 (-5.6, 1.9)
Lincoln County 6 167.7 (125.7, 219.4) 33 (7, 58) 11 falling falling trend -4.5 (-7.7, -1.4)
Grady County 6 167.5 (131.1, 210.9) 34 (8, 57) 15 stable stable trend -0.7 (-3.6, 2.6)
Garfield County 6 167.1 (132.4, 208.0) 35 (9, 57) 16 rising rising trend 14.7 (5.0, 22.9)
Johnston County 6 165.4 (96.1, 265.0) 36 (1, 58) 3 falling falling trend -4.5 (-8.2, -1.0)
Marshall County 6 164.7 (111.0, 235.3) 37 (3, 58) 6 falling falling trend -5.2 (-9.5, -1.2)
Rogers County 6 164.6 (136.5, 196.9) 38 (13, 56) 24 stable stable trend -2.1 (-4.7, 0.8)
Logan County 6 164.6 (124.7, 213.0) 39 (7, 58) 12 falling falling trend -3.9 (-6.4, -1.4)
Oklahoma County 6 163.7 (152.8, 175.1) 40 (23, 49) 173 stable stable trend -1.9 (-3.2, 1.9)
Delaware County 6 162.8 (129.5, 202.1) 41 (11, 57) 17 stable stable trend -1.6 (-4.9, 2.0)
Carter County 6 162.0 (125.1, 206.6) 42 (10, 58) 13 falling falling trend -3.5 (-6.4, -0.9)
Ottawa County 6 159.1 (115.5, 213.8) 43 (7, 58) 9 falling falling trend -6.6 (-8.8, -4.8)
Canadian County 6 159.0 (133.9, 187.6) 44 (16, 56) 29 falling falling trend -3.6 (-6.2, -0.8)
McIntosh County 6 157.6 (112.0, 215.6) 45 (7, 58) 8 stable stable trend -2.8 (-6.4, 0.9)
McClain County 6 155.6 (113.7, 208.0) 46 (9, 58) 9 falling falling trend -5.4 (-9.1, -1.5)
Tulsa County 6 155.5 (144.1, 167.5) 47 (28, 53) 143 falling falling trend -3.4 (-4.1, -2.6)
Le Flore County 6 152.6 (118.2, 194.1) 48 (12, 58) 14 stable stable trend -2.1 (-6.9, 2.9)
Washington County 6 150.9 (118.7, 189.1) 49 (15, 58) 15 falling falling trend -3.2 (-4.9, -1.5)
Pottawatomie County 6 148.8 (118.7, 184.1) 50 (17, 58) 17 falling falling trend -3.3 (-5.4, -1.3)
Wagoner County 6 146.1 (117.4, 179.7) 51 (19, 58) 19 stable stable trend -2.1 (-5.8, 2.2)
Jackson County 6 145.6 (95.8, 212.3) 52 (6, 58) 5 stable stable trend -2.5 (-6.0, 0.9)
Seminole County 6 144.3 (98.6, 204.2) 53 (10, 58) 6 falling falling trend -4.5 (-9.5, -0.1)
Cleveland County 6 143.1 (126.0, 161.9) 54 (30, 57) 52 falling falling trend -3.6 (-5.1, -1.9)
Payne County 6 134.4 (104.6, 170.1) 55 (23, 58) 14 falling falling trend -4.7 (-8.6, -1.0)
Pittsburg County 6 130.7 (99.2, 169.2) 56 (22, 58) 12 falling falling trend -4.0 (-6.9, -1.4)
Pushmataha County 6 126.3 (72.1, 205.4) 57 (9, 58) 3 stable stable trend -3.4 (-9.2, 2.0)
Murray County 6 114.9 (65.5, 187.5) 58 (14, 58) 3 stable stable trend -2.4 (-6.8, 1.9)
Alfalfa County 6
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Beaver County 6
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Cimarron County 6
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Coal County 6
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Cotton County 6
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Dewey County 6
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Ellis County 6
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Grant County 6
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Greer County 6
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Harmon County 6
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Harper County 6
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Hughes County 6
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Jefferson County 6
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Love County 6
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Major County 6
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Noble County 6
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Roger Mills County 6
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Tillman County 6
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Washita County 6
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Notes:
Created by statecancerprofiles.cancer.gov on 06/26/2024 2:36 am.

State Cancer Registries may provide more current or more local data.

Data cannot be shown for the following areas. For more information on what areas are suppressed or not available, please refer to the table.
Alfalfa, Beaver, Cimarron, Coal, Cotton, Dewey, Ellis, Grant, Greer, Harmon, Harper, Hughes, Jefferson, Love, Major, Noble, Roger Mills, Tillman, Washita

† Incidence rates (cases per 100,000 population per year) are age-adjusted to the 2000 US standard population (19 age groups: <1, 1-4, 5-9, ... , 80-84, 85+). 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.
Rates and trends are computed using different standards for malignancy. For more information see malignant.html.

^ All Stages refers to any stage in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) summary stage.
* 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).

Source: SEER and NPCR data. For more specific information please see the table.
Data for the United States does not include data from Nevada.
Data for the 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