Return to Home Incidence > Table

Incidence Rates Table

Data Options
Comparison Options

Incidence Rate Report for Mississippi by County

Breast (All Stages^), 2018-2022

All Races (includes Hispanic), Female, 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
Mississippi 2 N/A 125.6 (123.3, 128.0) N/A 2,347 rising rising trend 0.8 (0.4, 1.2)
US (SEER+NPCR) 1 N/A 131.3 (131.1, 131.6) N/A 270,245 rising rising trend 0.6 (0.5, 0.8)
Humphreys County 2 Rural 196.7 (142.7, 264.9) 1 (1, 59) 10 rising rising trend 3.6 (0.1, 7.8)
Quitman County 2 Rural 180.9 (127.9, 250.8) 2 (1, 73) 8 rising rising trend 5.0 (1.3, 9.8)
Tishomingo County 2 Rural 177.7 (145.0, 216.1) 3 (1, 37) 24 stable stable trend -12.7 (-25.0, 4.1)
Covington County 2 Rural 166.2 (133.8, 204.4) 4 (1, 52) 19 rising rising trend 4.2 (1.2, 7.9)
Kemper County 2 Rural 162.9 (112.4, 228.2) 5 (1, 79) 8 stable stable trend 4.6 (-1.3, 11.4)
Madison County 2 Urban 160.1 (146.4, 174.8) 6 (2, 25) 106 stable stable trend 1.6 (-1.1, 7.8)
Monroe County 2 Rural 157.0 (133.9, 183.2) 7 (1, 45) 37 rising rising trend 3.1 (0.8, 5.7)
Montgomery County 2 Rural 156.1 (115.9, 207.1) 8 (1, 75) 11 rising rising trend 3.0 (0.1, 6.1)
Sharkey County 2 Rural 154.5 (91.8, 247.2) 9 (1, 81) 4 rising rising trend 38.9 (8.2, 72.4)
Grenada County 2 Rural 149.1 (120.5, 182.7) 10 (1, 67) 21 stable stable trend 0.8 (-1.4, 3.1)
Attala County 2 Rural 148.9 (118.0, 185.7) 11 (1, 70) 18 rising rising trend 10.4 (0.6, 25.8)
Clay County 2 Rural 145.5 (115.8, 180.7) 12 (1, 72) 19 rising rising trend 3.5 (1.1, 6.0)
Leflore County 2 Rural 145.0 (119.4, 174.5) 13 (1, 65) 24 stable stable trend 1.9 (-0.2, 4.2)
Holmes County 2 Urban 144.2 (112.3, 182.6) 14 (1, 76) 15 stable stable trend 0.9 (-3.3, 5.2)
Smith County 2 Rural 143.3 (110.3, 183.6) 15 (1, 76) 14 rising rising trend 3.8 (0.6, 7.6)
Lee County 2 Rural 142.1 (127.7, 157.9) 16 (5, 48) 74 stable stable trend 0.6 (-0.5, 1.8)
Pontotoc County 2 Rural 141.5 (117.5, 169.0) 17 (2, 66) 26 stable stable trend 0.5 (-1.8, 3.0)
Lafayette County 2 Rural 141.0 (121.5, 162.7) 18 (3, 59) 39 stable stable trend 0.8 (-1.0, 2.8)
Coahoma County 2 Rural 138.7 (111.4, 170.9) 19 (2, 73) 19 rising rising trend 2.8 (0.3, 5.5)
Hinds County 2 Urban 138.5 (129.6, 147.8) 20 (9, 41) 195 rising rising trend 2.2 (0.9, 4.9)
Simpson County 2 Urban 137.7 (113.2, 166.2) 21 (3, 71) 24 stable stable trend 1.9 (-0.5, 4.5)
Washington County 2 Rural 135.6 (116.6, 156.8) 22 (5, 64) 41 rising rising trend 2.0 (0.6, 3.4)
Walthall County 2 Rural 133.6 (101.0, 174.0) 23 (1, 79) 13 rising rising trend 3.8 (1.5, 6.4)
Chickasaw County 2 Rural 133.5 (103.7, 169.7) 24 (2, 78) 15 stable stable trend 1.0 (-2.0, 4.2)
Hancock County 2 Urban 133.0 (115.1, 153.2) 25 (6, 68) 45 stable stable trend 1.2 (-0.3, 2.9)
Tunica County 2 Urban 132.3 (90.6, 186.4) 26 (1, 81) 7 stable stable trend -0.5 (-3.8, 2.7)
Copiah County 2 Urban 130.9 (107.3, 158.3) 27 (4, 74) 24 stable stable trend 0.5 (-1.6, 2.5)
Lowndes County 2 Rural 130.8 (114.4, 148.9) 28 (7, 67) 50 stable stable trend 0.4 (-1.5, 2.4)
Wayne County 2 Rural 130.4 (102.4, 163.8) 29 (3, 78) 16 stable stable trend 2.5 (-0.2, 5.5)
Yazoo County 2 Urban 128.9 (102.7, 160.0) 30 (3, 77) 18 stable stable trend -0.1 (-2.3, 2.2)
Adams County 2 Rural 128.7 (104.9, 156.6) 31 (4, 77) 25 stable stable trend 0.7 (-1.6, 2.8)
Warren County 2 Rural 128.7 (110.0, 149.8) 32 (7, 72) 37 stable stable trend -0.4 (-2.5, 1.7)
Jefferson County 2 Rural 128.5 (87.1, 184.9) 33 (1, 81) 7 stable stable trend -0.4 (-5.7, 6.0)
Tallahatchie County 2 Rural 128.0 (91.4, 174.5) 34 (1, 81) 9 stable stable trend 0.9 (-3.0, 4.9)
Claiborne County 2 Rural 127.0 (83.4, 184.8) 35 (1, 81) 6 stable stable trend 4.4 (-0.5, 10.3)
Benton County 2 Urban 126.8 (86.0, 182.0) 36 (1, 81) 7
*
*
Yalobusha County 2 Rural 126.7 (93.8, 168.2) 37 (2, 81) 11 stable stable trend -0.3 (-3.6, 3.3)
Rankin County 2 Urban 125.9 (116.0, 136.4) 38 (16, 61) 126 stable stable trend 0.5 (-0.6, 1.7)
Noxubee County 2 Rural 125.7 (89.6, 172.2) 39 (2, 81) 9 stable stable trend 0.7 (-3.1, 4.5)
Jackson County 2 Urban 125.4 (115.0, 136.5) 40 (16, 62) 115 stable stable trend 0.8 (-0.1, 1.8)
Stone County 2 Urban 124.7 (96.1, 159.6) 41 (3, 80) 14 stable stable trend 0.7 (-1.6, 3.2)
Pearl River County 2 Rural 123.8 (107.6, 141.8) 42 (12, 72) 48 stable stable trend 1.4 (-0.3, 3.3)
Oktibbeha County 2 Rural 122.4 (101.9, 145.8) 43 (8, 77) 27 stable stable trend 0.4 (-2.3, 3.1)
Marion County 2 Rural 122.2 (99.4, 149.2) 44 (6, 78) 22 stable stable trend 1.0 (-2.1, 4.2)
Forrest County 2 Urban 122.0 (107.3, 138.1) 45 (14, 72) 53 stable stable trend 0.1 (-2.1, 2.3)
Jasper County 2 Rural 120.5 (92.9, 154.5) 46 (5, 80) 15 stable stable trend 0.5 (-2.8, 4.0)
DeSoto County 2 Urban 119.7 (110.4, 129.6) 47 (24, 67) 127 stable stable trend 0.6 (-0.5, 1.8)
Lamar County 2 Urban 119.1 (103.6, 136.3) 48 (14, 76) 44 stable stable trend -0.1 (-2.0, 1.9)
Itawamba County 2 Rural 118.7 (94.9, 147.1) 49 (7, 80) 18 stable stable trend -0.4 (-3.7, 3.1)
Pike County 2 Rural 118.7 (100.0, 140.0) 50 (11, 78) 31 stable stable trend 0.5 (-1.7, 2.7)
Choctaw County 2 Rural 117.4 (80.7, 167.1) 51 (2, 81) 7 stable stable trend 0.8 (-2.9, 4.9)
Scott County 2 Urban 117.3 (94.5, 144.1) 52 (8, 80) 20 stable stable trend 1.7 (-0.4, 3.8)
Newton County 2 Rural 114.3 (89.4, 144.1) 53 (7, 80) 16 stable stable trend 0.7 (-1.6, 3.1)
Harrison County 2 Urban 114.2 (105.8, 123.1) 54 (32, 71) 147 stable stable trend -0.4 (-2.6, 0.6)
Tate County 2 Urban 114.1 (92.0, 140.1) 55 (10, 80) 20 stable stable trend -0.3 (-2.2, 1.7)
Union County 2 Rural 112.4 (90.4, 138.4) 56 (10, 80) 19 stable stable trend 0.7 (-2.4, 4.0)
Alcorn County 2 Rural 112.4 (92.8, 135.1) 57 (14, 80) 26 stable stable trend -0.7 (-20.8, 3.6)
Webster County 2 Rural 112.3 (77.5, 158.1) 58 (3, 81) 8 stable stable trend 0.5 (-3.5, 4.8)
Lauderdale County 2 Rural 111.7 (98.2, 126.6) 59 (24, 77) 54 stable stable trend 0.8 (-1.0, 2.6)
Lincoln County 2 Rural 111.2 (93.0, 132.3) 60 (17, 80) 28 stable stable trend 0.7 (-1.9, 3.4)
Sunflower County 2 Rural 111.1 (87.6, 139.3) 61 (10, 81) 17 falling falling trend -17.1 (-28.1, -1.0)
Panola County 2 Rural 110.4 (90.4, 133.6) 62 (16, 80) 23 stable stable trend -0.3 (-4.6, 1.6)
Wilkinson County 2 Rural 110.0 (71.9, 162.6) 63 (2, 81) 6 stable stable trend -1.2 (-4.1, 1.7)
Leake County 2 Rural 109.5 (84.6, 139.7) 64 (10, 81) 14 stable stable trend 0.3 (-2.4, 3.0)
Marshall County 2 Urban 108.9 (90.0, 131.1) 65 (18, 80) 26 stable stable trend 2.1 (-0.2, 4.6)
Carroll County 2 Rural 108.3 (76.4, 151.7) 66 (4, 81) 9 stable stable trend -0.6 (-4.5, 4.0)
Calhoun County 2 Rural 106.7 (78.1, 143.1) 67 (8, 81) 10 stable stable trend 0.4 (-2.8, 3.6)
Tippah County 2 Rural 105.4 (82.2, 133.4) 68 (13, 81) 15 stable stable trend 1.6 (-1.7, 5.4)
Jones County 2 Rural 105.4 (91.6, 120.7) 69 (31, 79) 46 stable stable trend 0.7 (-0.6, 2.0)
Neshoba County 2 Rural 104.1 (82.7, 129.2) 70 (19, 81) 18 stable stable trend -1.0 (-3.3, 1.3)
Prentiss County 2 Rural 103.7 (81.4, 130.5) 71 (18, 81) 16 stable stable trend -0.3 (-2.7, 2.2)
Clarke County 2 Rural 102.9 (76.3, 136.4) 72 (11, 81) 12 stable stable trend -1.8 (-4.0, 0.2)
Lawrence County 2 Rural 102.7 (72.3, 142.3) 73 (7, 81) 8 stable stable trend -0.6 (-4.6, 3.1)
Jefferson Davis County 2 Rural 101.6 (73.6, 138.4) 74 (11, 81) 10 stable stable trend -0.8 (-2.9, 1.3)
Amite County 2 Rural 100.9 (73.8, 136.2) 75 (9, 81) 11 stable stable trend -0.9 (-3.7, 1.9)
Perry County 2 Urban 99.3 (67.6, 141.1) 76 (8, 81) 7 stable stable trend -2.4 (-6.6, 1.2)
George County 2 Rural 98.7 (76.7, 125.5) 77 (21, 81) 15 stable stable trend 1.1 (-2.0, 4.5)
Bolivar County 2 Rural 95.8 (76.9, 118.1) 78 (33, 81) 20 falling falling trend -10.7 (-25.2, -3.3)
Greene County 2 Rural 92.3 (61.8, 133.0) 79 (12, 81) 6 stable stable trend 1.2 (-3.6, 6.3)
Winston County 2 Rural 82.7 (61.0, 110.3) 80 (36, 81) 11 stable stable trend -0.8 (-4.6, 2.9)
Franklin County 2 Rural 76.2 (46.7, 119.9) 81 (28, 81) 4 stable stable trend -2.3 (-6.7, 1.9)
Issaquena County 2 Rural
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*

Notes:
Created by statecancerprofiles.cancer.gov on 03/12/2026 9:00 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