Return to Home Incidence > Table

Incidence Rates Table

Data Options
Comparison Options

Incidence Rate Report for Missouri by County

Melanoma of the Skin (All Stages^), 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
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
Missouri 2 N/A 20.4 (20.0, 20.9) N/A 1,513 rising rising trend 1.3 (0.8, 1.7)
US (SEER+NPCR) 1 N/A 23.1 (23.0, 23.2) N/A 91,120 stable stable trend 0.2 (-1.1, 1.2)
St. Louis City 2 Urban 9.8 (8.3, 11.5) 76 (70, 76) 33 stable stable trend 1.6 (-0.2, 3.5)
Texas County 2 Rural 12.2 (7.1, 19.7) 75 (29, 76) 4
*
*
Butler County 2 Rural 13.0 (8.9, 18.5) 74 (37, 76) 7 rising rising trend 4.0 (1.8, 6.5)
Vernon County 2 Rural 13.5 (7.7, 22.4) 73 (18, 76) 3
*
*
Ray County 2 Urban 13.9 (8.5, 21.7) 72 (19, 76) 4 stable stable trend 1.5 (-2.4, 5.9)
Washington County 2 Rural 14.6 (8.9, 22.7) 71 (16, 76) 4
*
*
Adair County 2 Rural 15.3 (9.1, 24.3) 70 (12, 76) 4 stable stable trend 1.4 (-3.9, 7.5)
Buchanan County 2 Urban 15.3 (12.0, 19.3) 69 (33, 76) 15 stable stable trend 2.2 (-1.8, 6.6)
Laclede County 2 Rural 15.7 (10.8, 22.3) 68 (19, 76) 7
*
*
Saline County 2 Rural 15.7 (9.8, 24.1) 67 (13, 76) 5 stable stable trend 0.5 (-2.8, 4.3)
Jackson County 2 Urban 15.8 (14.6, 17.1) 66 (50, 72) 126 stable stable trend 0.4 (-1.0, 1.5)
Nodaway County 2 Rural 15.8 (9.3, 25.6) 65 (10, 76) 4 stable stable trend -2.0 (-14.6, 2.9)
Platte County 2 Urban 16.0 (12.9, 19.6) 64 (33, 75) 19 stable stable trend 1.8 (-0.1, 4.2)
Webster County 2 Urban 16.3 (11.2, 22.9) 63 (17, 76) 7 stable stable trend -2.1 (-16.7, 1.8)
Crawford County 2 Rural 16.9 (10.9, 25.3) 62 (9, 76) 5 stable stable trend 0.0 (-3.7, 4.1)
Stoddard County 2 Rural 17.0 (11.5, 24.5) 61 (13, 76) 7 stable stable trend 0.4 (-2.5, 3.7)
Bates County 2 Urban 17.1 (10.2, 27.6) 60 (5, 76) 4
*
*
Dunklin County 2 Rural 17.2 (11.1, 25.5) 59 (9, 76) 5
*
*
Clay County 2 Urban 17.3 (15.1, 19.6) 58 (33, 71) 49 stable stable trend 0.3 (-1.8, 2.6)
Newton County 2 Urban 17.6 (13.5, 22.6) 57 (19, 74) 13 stable stable trend -0.1 (-3.1, 3.1)
Taney County 2 Rural 18.3 (14.0, 23.7) 56 (14, 74) 14 stable stable trend 1.5 (-1.3, 4.8)
Greene County 2 Urban 18.5 (16.4, 20.8) 55 (28, 67) 61 stable stable trend 0.8 (-0.7, 2.4)
Scott County 2 Rural 18.7 (13.5, 25.3) 54 (11, 75) 9 stable stable trend 1.3 (-1.9, 5.0)
Callaway County 2 Urban 18.7 (13.8, 25.0) 53 (12, 75) 10 rising rising trend 3.4 (0.4, 7.4)
Perry County 2 Rural 19.1 (11.8, 29.3) 52 (4, 76) 5
*
*
Stone County 2 Rural 19.4 (12.9, 28.1) 51 (5, 76) 8 stable stable trend -0.1 (-4.0, 3.9)
Jefferson County 2 Urban 19.5 (17.2, 22.1) 50 (24, 64) 54 stable stable trend -0.9 (-3.3, 0.2)
Randolph County 2 Rural 19.5 (13.1, 28.3) 49 (6, 76) 6
*
*
Audrain County 2 Rural 19.6 (12.8, 28.7) 48 (5, 76) 6 stable stable trend -0.8 (-5.2, 3.7)
Dent County 2 Rural 19.6 (11.3, 32.0) 47 (2, 76) 4
*
*
Lafayette County 2 Urban 19.7 (14.0, 27.2) 46 (9, 75) 8 stable stable trend 1.6 (-1.4, 5.0)
Johnson County 2 Rural 19.8 (14.6, 26.3) 45 (9, 74) 10 stable stable trend -3.2 (-10.7, 0.6)
Christian County 2 Urban 20.1 (16.3, 24.6) 44 (14, 69) 21 falling falling trend -3.7 (-11.5, -0.4)
Linn County 2 Rural 20.2 (11.7, 33.2) 43 (2, 76) 4
*
*
Pettis County 2 Rural 20.3 (15.1, 26.9) 42 (9, 73) 11 stable stable trend 3.2 (-0.5, 8.1)
Wright County 2 Rural 20.4 (12.8, 31.0) 41 (3, 76) 5
*
*
Miller County 2 Rural 20.6 (14.1, 29.3) 40 (5, 75) 7
*
*
Cass County 2 Urban 20.6 (17.2, 24.6) 39 (14, 66) 27 rising rising trend 1.9 (0.2, 3.9)
Lawrence County 2 Rural 20.9 (15.1, 28.1) 38 (6, 73) 9 stable stable trend 2.2 (-1.2, 6.1)
St. Francois County 2 Rural 20.9 (16.5, 26.1) 37 (10, 70) 16 stable stable trend 0.3 (-2.3, 3.1)
Jasper County 2 Urban 21.3 (17.9, 25.1) 36 (12, 65) 29 rising rising trend 4.6 (1.6, 16.8)
Dallas County 2 Urban 21.3 (12.7, 33.6) 35 (2, 76) 4 stable stable trend 1.2 (-3.0, 5.9)
Pike County 2 Rural 21.3 (13.3, 32.7) 34 (2, 76) 5 stable stable trend 2.3 (-2.0, 7.1)
Cape Girardeau County 2 Urban 21.5 (17.3, 26.3) 33 (10, 66) 21 rising rising trend 4.8 (2.6, 7.9)
Warren County 2 Urban 21.6 (15.7, 29.0) 32 (4, 73) 10 stable stable trend 0.5 (-3.1, 4.8)
Clinton County 2 Urban 21.6 (14.3, 31.6) 31 (2, 76) 6
*
*
Howell County 2 Rural 21.6 (16.1, 28.6) 30 (5, 72) 11 stable stable trend 3.2 (-0.4, 7.6)
Lincoln County 2 Urban 21.9 (17.0, 27.7) 29 (6, 68) 15 stable stable trend 0.7 (-2.8, 4.7)
Barry County 2 Rural 22.0 (16.0, 29.5) 28 (4, 71) 10 stable stable trend 1.5 (-2.6, 6.2)
Barton County 2 Rural 22.2 (12.2, 37.3) 27 (1, 76) 3
*
*
Macon County 2 Rural 22.4 (13.2, 35.7) 26 (1, 76) 4
*
*
Phelps County 2 Rural 22.6 (16.9, 29.5) 25 (4, 70) 12 stable stable trend 4.0 (-0.8, 10.2)
Pulaski County 2 Rural 22.8 (16.6, 30.5) 24 (4, 71) 9 rising rising trend 4.5 (0.9, 9.5)
Henry County 2 Rural 23.5 (15.8, 33.8) 23 (1, 74) 7 stable stable trend 3.0 (-0.8, 7.6)
Polk County 2 Urban 23.5 (16.4, 32.6) 22 (2, 73) 8 rising rising trend 4.5 (0.5, 9.8)
Morgan County 2 Rural 23.6 (15.8, 34.0) 21 (1, 74) 7 stable stable trend 0.7 (-2.3, 4.0)
Cooper County 2 Urban 23.6 (14.6, 36.2) 20 (1, 75) 5 stable stable trend 3.9 (-1.6, 11.1)
Livingston County 2 Rural 24.1 (15.1, 36.8) 19 (1, 75) 5
*
*
St. Louis County 2 Urban 24.3 (23.0, 25.6) 18 (13, 34) 306 stable stable trend 1.0 (-2.0, 1.7)
Gasconade County 2 Rural 24.6 (15.4, 37.8) 17 (1, 75) 5 stable stable trend 0.6 (-4.1, 5.8)
Moniteau County 2 Urban 25.3 (15.8, 38.5) 16 (1, 74) 5
*
*
Cole County 2 Urban 25.7 (21.2, 31.0) 15 (3, 51) 24 rising rising trend 4.1 (1.5, 7.5)
Andrew County 2 Urban 26.2 (17.5, 38.1) 14 (1, 72) 6 rising rising trend 5.4 (1.4, 12.0)
St. Charles County 2 Urban 26.6 (24.5, 28.8) 13 (6, 29) 128 stable stable trend 0.8 (-0.6, 2.3)
Benton County 2 Rural 29.6 (20.4, 42.0) 12 (1, 63) 10 rising rising trend 4.5 (0.1, 10.9)
Franklin County 2 Urban 29.6 (25.4, 34.3) 11 (1, 29) 40 stable stable trend 1.5 (-0.3, 3.5)
Marion County 2 Rural 29.6 (21.5, 39.9) 10 (1, 57) 10 stable stable trend 2.9 (-0.1, 6.5)
Osage County 2 Urban 30.2 (19.3, 45.5) 9 (1, 70) 5
*
*
Howard County 2 Urban 30.3 (17.4, 49.4) 8 (1, 75) 4
*
*
Camden County 2 Rural 30.7 (25.2, 37.3) 7 (1, 32) 26 rising rising trend 4.1 (1.0, 8.4)
Boone County 2 Urban 31.2 (27.6, 35.2) 6 (1, 20) 56 rising rising trend 4.3 (2.6, 6.4)
Wayne County 2 Rural 31.8 (18.7, 50.8) 5 (1, 74) 4 stable stable trend 2.8 (-3.7, 9.6)
Lewis County 2 Rural 32.0 (18.3, 52.0) 4 (1, 75) 4
*
*
Cedar County 2 Rural 32.1 (21.2, 46.9) 3 (1, 64) 7
*
*
Madison County 2 Rural 33.1 (20.8, 50.1) 2 (1, 69) 5
*
*
Iron County 2 Rural 34.9 (20.2, 56.2) 1 (1, 72) 4
*
*
Atchison County 2 Rural
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Bollinger County 2 Urban
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Caldwell County 2 Urban
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Carroll County 2 Rural
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Carter County 2 Rural
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Chariton County 2 Rural
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Clark County 2 Rural
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Dade County 2 Rural
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Daviess County 2 Rural
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
DeKalb County 2 Urban
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Douglas County 2 Rural
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Gentry County 2 Rural
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Grundy County 2 Rural
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Harrison County 2 Rural
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Hickory County 2 Rural
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Holt County 2 Rural
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Knox County 2 Rural
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Maries County 2 Rural
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
McDonald County 2 Rural
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Mercer County 2 Rural
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Mississippi County 2 Rural
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Monroe County 2 Rural
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Montgomery County 2 Rural
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
New Madrid County 2 Rural
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Oregon County 2 Rural
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Ozark County 2 Rural
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Pemiscot County 2 Rural
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Putnam County 2 Rural
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Ralls County 2 Rural
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Reynolds County 2 Rural
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Ripley County 2 Rural
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Schuyler County 2 Rural
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Scotland County 2 Rural
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Shannon County 2 Rural
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Shelby County 2 Rural
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
St. Clair County 2 Rural
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Ste. Genevieve County 2 Rural
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Sullivan County 2 Rural
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Worth County 2 Rural
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*

Notes:
Created by statecancerprofiles.cancer.gov on 03/11/2026 9:49 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