Return to Home Incidence > Table

Incidence Rates Table

Data Options
Comparison Options

Incidence Rate Report for Michigan by County

Breast (All Stages^), 2018-2022

All Races (includes Hispanic), Female, All Ages

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
Michigan 2 N/A 130.4 (129.1, 131.7) N/A 8,495 rising rising trend 0.5 (0.3, 0.9)
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)
Iron County 2 Rural 80.3 (54.0, 117.1) 80 (20, 82) 9 falling falling trend -20.9 (-44.3, -0.7)
Presque Isle County 2 Rural 168.6 (128.0, 219.3) 1 (1, 66) 17 stable stable trend -11.8 (-26.5, 2.6)
Baraga County 2 Rural 52.2 (27.9, 92.6) 82 (66, 82) 3 stable stable trend -2.4 (-6.8, 1.5)
Houghton County 2 Rural 68.1 (52.5, 87.0) 81 (71, 82) 15 stable stable trend -2.3 (-5.4, 0.5)
Muskegon County 2 Urban 86.7 (78.8, 95.2) 76 (67, 81) 100 falling falling trend -1.9 (-3.3, -0.5)
Oceana County 2 Rural 84.2 (65.6, 106.9) 77 (50, 82) 16 stable stable trend -1.8 (-4.6, 0.9)
Kalkaska County 2 Urban 101.4 (77.4, 131.5) 73 (11, 81) 14 stable stable trend -1.5 (-3.5, 0.5)
Montcalm County 2 Urban 115.2 (100.3, 131.7) 53 (15, 75) 48 stable stable trend -1.2 (-3.1, 0.7)
Roscommon County 2 Rural 108.0 (89.3, 131.4) 63 (12, 79) 28 stable stable trend -1.2 (-3.1, 0.8)
Missaukee County 2 Rural 109.4 (80.3, 146.2) 62 (2, 81) 11 stable stable trend -1.0 (-3.5, 1.5)
Schoolcraft County 2 Rural 81.8 (49.9, 129.4) 78 (8, 82) 5 stable stable trend -0.9 (-5.7, 3.8)
Cass County 2 Urban 103.4 (88.2, 120.8) 71 (27, 79) 38 stable stable trend -0.8 (-2.5, 0.9)
Mackinac County 2 Rural 127.8 (90.5, 176.9) 31 (1, 80) 10 stable stable trend -0.7 (-5.0, 3.5)
Oscoda County 2 Rural 98.5 (64.3, 147.5) 74 (2, 82) 7 stable stable trend -0.7 (-4.4, 2.5)
Marquette County 2 Rural 112.5 (97.7, 129.1) 60 (18, 76) 48 stable stable trend -0.6 (-2.0, 0.8)
Newaygo County 2 Rural 113.1 (96.9, 131.5) 58 (14, 76) 39 stable stable trend -0.6 (-3.0, 2.0)
Otsego County 2 Rural 105.3 (82.4, 132.9) 69 (9, 81) 17 stable stable trend -0.6 (-3.4, 2.2)
Antrim County 2 Rural 116.3 (93.5, 143.9) 52 (4, 78) 23 stable stable trend -0.5 (-3.6, 2.5)
Grand Traverse County 2 Urban 113.8 (102.0, 126.8) 56 (22, 74) 78 stable stable trend -0.5 (-1.5, 0.5)
Alger County 2 Rural 107.8 (68.4, 163.7) 64 (1, 82) 6 stable stable trend -0.4 (-4.1, 2.9)
Cheboygan County 2 Rural 118.7 (96.7, 145.0) 49 (2, 78) 26 stable stable trend -0.4 (-2.8, 1.8)
Manistee County 2 Rural 114.6 (91.7, 142.2) 54 (5, 79) 23 stable stable trend -0.4 (-2.7, 1.9)
Dickinson County 2 Rural 94.4 (73.1, 120.2) 75 (22, 82) 16 stable stable trend -0.3 (-4.4, 3.6)
Charlevoix County 2 Rural 102.1 (82.6, 125.7) 72 (19, 80) 23 stable stable trend -0.2 (-2.3, 1.9)
Kalamazoo County 2 Urban 134.8 (126.3, 143.9) 20 (7, 45) 199 stable stable trend -0.2 (-1.5, 1.2)
Iosco County 2 Rural 103.7 (83.2, 128.7) 70 (14, 80) 24 stable stable trend -0.1 (-1.8, 1.6)
Kent County 2 Urban 136.9 (131.5, 142.6) 17 (8, 34) 506 stable stable trend -0.1 (-0.7, 0.6)
Ottawa County 2 Urban 126.7 (119.0, 134.9) 33 (16, 56) 214 stable stable trend -0.1 (-1.1, 0.9)
Allegan County 2 Rural 127.2 (115.6, 139.7) 32 (8, 62) 98 stable stable trend 0.0 (-1.2, 1.2)
Genesee County 2 Urban 118.0 (112.0, 124.2) 51 (30, 64) 321 stable stable trend 0.0 (-0.8, 0.8)
Hillsdale County 2 Rural 105.4 (89.1, 124.1) 68 (25, 79) 34 stable stable trend 0.0 (-1.9, 1.9)
St. Clair County 2 Urban 121.8 (112.3, 131.9) 41 (19, 65) 138 stable stable trend 0.0 (-1.4, 1.4)
Chippewa County 2 Rural 121.5 (99.8, 146.7) 42 (3, 76) 26 stable stable trend 0.1 (-1.9, 2.1)
Crawford County 2 Rural 112.2 (81.9, 151.6) 61 (1, 81) 11 stable stable trend 0.1 (-3.8, 4.4)
Gogebic County 2 Rural 107.6 (78.5, 145.1) 65 (2, 81) 12 stable stable trend 0.1 (-3.6, 3.7)
Berrien County 2 Urban 124.3 (114.3, 134.9) 36 (14, 63) 133 stable stable trend 0.2 (-0.9, 1.3)
Branch County 2 Rural 118.4 (100.0, 139.4) 50 (7, 75) 34 stable stable trend 0.2 (-1.4, 1.8)
Jackson County 2 Urban 126.7 (116.6, 137.4) 34 (12, 60) 132 stable stable trend 0.2 (-1.0, 1.4)
Livingston County 2 Urban 128.8 (119.8, 138.4) 29 (10, 55) 169 stable stable trend 0.2 (-0.5, 1.1)
Ontonagon County 2 Rural 122.3 (72.2, 200.6) 40 (1, 82) 6 stable stable trend 0.2 (-4.9, 5.6)
Washtenaw County 2 Urban 142.1 (134.6, 149.8) 14 (4, 32) 291 stable stable trend 0.2 (-0.7, 1.1)
Emmet County 2 Rural 159.2 (135.1, 186.7) 2 (1, 46) 38 stable stable trend 0.3 (-2.2, 2.7)
Gratiot County 2 Rural 124.3 (104.2, 147.3) 35 (3, 74) 31 stable stable trend 0.3 (-1.8, 2.5)
Wayne County 2 Urban 131.7 (128.6, 134.9) 23 (17, 38) 1,472 stable stable trend 0.3 (-0.1, 0.6)
Leelanau County 2 Urban 141.1 (113.7, 174.0) 15 (1, 71) 27 stable stable trend 0.4 (-1.9, 2.8)
Luce County 2 Rural 130.7 (83.4, 199.6) 26 (1, 81) 6 stable stable trend 0.4 (-4.2, 4.8)
St. Joseph County 2 Rural 119.8 (104.2, 137.2) 45 (9, 73) 47 stable stable trend 0.4 (-1.3, 2.1)
Benzie County 2 Urban 123.1 (96.2, 156.2) 37 (1, 78) 18 stable stable trend 0.5 (-1.2, 2.3)
Calhoun County 2 Urban 122.5 (111.9, 133.9) 38 (14, 66) 108 stable stable trend 0.5 (-1.1, 2.1)
Ionia County 2 Urban 122.4 (106.5, 140.0) 39 (7, 72) 46 stable stable trend 0.5 (-0.7, 1.9)
Lenawee County 2 Rural 113.5 (101.8, 126.2) 57 (24, 73) 78 stable stable trend 0.5 (-0.7, 1.8)
Monroe County 2 Urban 105.8 (96.5, 115.8) 67 (42, 75) 108 stable stable trend 0.5 (-1.1, 2.3)
Saginaw County 2 Urban 133.2 (124.0, 143.0) 22 (6, 50) 176 stable stable trend 0.5 (-0.4, 1.5)
Midland County 2 Urban 148.1 (133.5, 164.0) 8 (1, 37) 84 stable stable trend 0.6 (-0.7, 2.1)
Tuscola County 2 Rural 119.2 (102.9, 137.5) 46 (9, 73) 45 stable stable trend 0.6 (-0.7, 1.9)
Alpena County 2 Rural 145.1 (121.2, 172.9) 9 (1, 64) 32 stable stable trend 0.8 (-0.8, 2.4)
Oakland County 2 Urban 142.2 (138.5, 146.0) 13 (5, 23) 1,199 rising rising trend 0.8 (0.3, 2.6)
Sanilac County 2 Rural 113.0 (94.7, 134.1) 59 (11, 78) 33 stable stable trend 0.8 (-0.9, 2.5)
Wexford County 2 Rural 114.1 (94.5, 136.9) 55 (7, 78) 27 stable stable trend 0.8 (-1.1, 3.0)
Menominee County 2 Rural 81.6 (61.8, 106.5) 79 (45, 82) 14 stable stable trend 0.9 (-4.0, 6.1)
Shiawassee County 2 Rural 129.0 (113.7, 145.9) 28 (4, 66) 59 stable stable trend 1.0 (-1.0, 7.3)
Arenac County 2 Rural 107.0 (81.3, 140.0) 66 (4, 81) 14 stable stable trend 1.2 (-1.9, 4.7)
Bay County 2 Urban 134.0 (121.9, 147.0) 21 (4, 54) 104 rising rising trend 1.4 (0.4, 2.5)
Clare County 2 Rural 120.4 (99.4, 144.9) 44 (4, 76) 29 stable stable trend 1.4 (-0.7, 3.6)
Delta County 2 Rural 142.6 (121.3, 167.0) 11 (1, 62) 40 stable stable trend 1.4 (-0.8, 3.8)
Gladwin County 2 Rural 131.2 (107.6, 159.1) 25 (1, 74) 28 stable stable trend 1.4 (-0.5, 3.5)
Huron County 2 Rural 135.2 (111.2, 163.0) 19 (1, 71) 30 stable stable trend 1.6 (-3.9, 11.2)
Barry County 2 Urban 118.8 (103.4, 136.0) 48 (10, 73) 48 stable stable trend 1.7 (-2.5, 12.7)
Clinton County 2 Urban 135.9 (121.3, 151.9) 18 (3, 58) 69 rising rising trend 1.7 (0.1, 3.6)
Macomb County 2 Urban 142.6 (138.1, 147.2) 12 (5, 24) 840 rising rising trend 1.7 (0.9, 4.1)
Ogemaw County 2 Rural 129.6 (101.9, 163.0) 27 (1, 77) 20 stable stable trend 2.1 (-0.7, 5.2)
Eaton County 2 Urban 152.3 (139.3, 166.2) 3 (1, 29) 114 rising rising trend 2.2 (1.1, 5.6)
Van Buren County 2 Rural 139.2 (124.2, 155.6) 16 (2, 53) 70 rising rising trend 2.2 (0.5, 7.7)
Lake County 2 Rural 151.4 (113.4, 200.1) 5 (1, 77) 14 stable stable trend 2.6 (-2.8, 14.6)
Ingham County 2 Urban 144.6 (136.0, 153.7) 10 (2, 30) 223 rising rising trend 2.9 (1.4, 7.3)
Montmorency County 2 Rural 150.5 (105.6, 210.1) 6 (1, 78) 12 rising rising trend 6.4 (2.8, 13.4)
Mason County 2 Rural 149.5 (125.0, 177.7) 7 (1, 58) 33 stable stable trend 7.4 (-4.2, 20.7)
Lapeer County 2 Urban 119.1 (106.3, 133.2) 47 (15, 71) 72 stable stable trend 7.5 (-0.9, 13.7)
Mecosta County 2 Rural 152.2 (130.2, 176.9) 4 (1, 49) 41 rising rising trend 8.3 (2.9, 21.9)
Isabella County 2 Rural 128.1 (110.0, 148.3) 30 (3, 72) 40 rising rising trend 14.5 (0.1, 25.5)
Osceola County 2 Rural 131.3 (105.7, 161.7) 24 (1, 75) 22 rising rising trend 15.0 (1.1, 33.0)
Alcona County 2 Rural 121.4 (84.5, 171.8) 43 (1, 81) 12 stable stable trend 23.2 (-0.7, 42.6)
Keweenaw County 2 Rural
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*

Notes:
Created by statecancerprofiles.cancer.gov on 03/11/2026 10:34 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