Return to Home Incidence > Table

Incidence Rates Table

Data Options
Comparison Options

Incidence Rate Report for North Carolina by County

Prostate (All Stages^), 2018-2022

All Races (includes Hispanic), Male, 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 ascending
North Carolina 2 N/A 132.3 (131.0, 133.6) N/A 8,614 rising rising trend 1.6 (0.6, 3.1)
US (SEER+NPCR) 1 N/A 116.4 (116.2, 116.6) N/A 240,633 rising rising trend 1.9 (0.8, 3.4)
Scotland County 2 Rural 134.6 (113.6, 158.8) 36 (3, 90) 31 rising rising trend 23.5 (8.7, 39.1)
Yadkin County 2 Urban 105.5 (89.0, 124.6) 86 (30, 98) 30 rising rising trend 17.8 (0.8, 32.5)
Hertford County 2 Rural 155.3 (127.4, 188.1) 8 (1, 79) 23 rising rising trend 15.7 (3.8, 25.6)
Beaufort County 2 Rural 141.1 (124.3, 160.2) 19 (3, 73) 55 rising rising trend 12.6 (6.9, 21.6)
Richmond County 2 Rural 152.6 (132.5, 175.1) 10 (1, 65) 44 rising rising trend 10.7 (6.1, 19.2)
Montgomery County 2 Rural 104.4 (85.3, 127.3) 87 (25, 98) 22 rising rising trend 10.4 (2.4, 25.1)
Hoke County 2 Urban 159.5 (135.7, 186.1) 4 (1, 60) 37 stable stable trend 10.0 (-0.3, 25.9)
Davie County 2 Urban 114.3 (98.4, 132.5) 77 (19, 95) 38 rising rising trend 9.9 (2.0, 28.8)
Forsyth County 2 Urban 140.9 (133.9, 148.2) 21 (9, 47) 322 rising rising trend 9.8 (5.8, 15.4)
McDowell County 2 Rural 124.4 (107.9, 143.1) 57 (11, 91) 43 stable stable trend 8.8 (-0.6, 22.9)
Person County 2 Urban 128.0 (109.7, 148.9) 50 (5, 90) 38 stable stable trend 8.0 (-0.6, 21.6)
Caldwell County 2 Urban 122.9 (110.5, 136.5) 60 (18, 87) 76 rising rising trend 7.3 (0.7, 14.4)
Edgecombe County 2 Urban 183.0 (162.6, 205.5) 2 (1, 17) 63 stable stable trend 6.6 (-0.8, 21.6)
Yancey County 2 Rural 98.1 (77.4, 124.1) 92 (27, 99) 16 stable stable trend 5.4 (-0.2, 17.2)
Cleveland County 2 Rural 132.4 (120.0, 145.9) 39 (9, 78) 89 rising rising trend 5.0 (1.1, 11.5)
Cumberland County 2 Urban 151.6 (143.0, 160.7) 13 (3, 31) 241 stable stable trend 4.9 (-0.3, 10.8)
Northampton County 2 Rural 158.5 (130.6, 192.1) 5 (1, 75) 25 stable stable trend 4.9 (-2.3, 21.5)
Robeson County 2 Rural 151.7 (138.5, 165.8) 12 (2, 42) 105 stable stable trend 4.9 (-1.5, 14.5)
Orange County 2 Urban 126.3 (115.3, 138.1) 52 (18, 81) 105 stable stable trend 4.6 (-0.9, 16.4)
Ashe County 2 Rural 115.1 (96.6, 137.1) 73 (14, 96) 29 stable stable trend 4.2 (-1.4, 18.3)
Davidson County 2 Urban 112.7 (104.1, 121.9) 79 (49, 92) 133 stable stable trend 4.2 (-0.5, 14.3)
Pitt County 2 Urban 136.2 (125.1, 148.1) 33 (8, 68) 119 stable stable trend 3.6 (-0.4, 12.0)
Pamlico County 2 Rural 134.1 (106.9, 169.2) 37 (2, 94) 18 stable stable trend 3.5 (-1.4, 17.5)
Buncombe County 2 Urban 121.8 (114.8, 129.2) 62 (35, 82) 235 rising rising trend 3.4 (0.8, 10.2)
Iredell County 2 Urban 151.7 (141.7, 162.3) 11 (3, 34) 184 rising rising trend 3.0 (0.2, 9.0)
Nash County 2 Urban 115.1 (103.3, 127.9) 74 (32, 92) 75 stable stable trend 3.0 (-1.8, 14.6)
Burke County 2 Urban 122.8 (111.0, 135.7) 61 (20, 88) 83 stable stable trend 2.9 (-1.0, 13.4)
Gaston County 2 Urban 129.6 (121.1, 138.6) 45 (18, 72) 183 rising rising trend 2.9 (1.3, 5.5)
Catawba County 2 Urban 135.1 (125.4, 145.6) 35 (11, 69) 150 stable stable trend 2.8 (-0.5, 9.7)
Chatham County 2 Urban 125.8 (113.8, 139.1) 53 (15, 86) 82 stable stable trend 2.5 (-0.5, 9.6)
Swain County 2 Rural 137.5 (106.3, 176.2) 29 (1, 94) 14 stable stable trend 2.5 (-0.7, 6.4)
Vance County 2 Rural 130.4 (111.2, 152.3) 43 (4, 89) 35 stable stable trend 2.3 (-4.4, 16.8)
Durham County 2 Urban 136.3 (128.2, 144.7) 32 (13, 60) 226 stable stable trend 2.2 (-1.7, 11.3)
Martin County 2 Rural 138.5 (114.2, 167.5) 25 (2, 89) 25 stable stable trend 2.2 (-0.3, 8.9)
Anson County 2 Urban 194.2 (163.2, 229.9) 1 (1, 20) 30 stable stable trend 2.1 (-0.7, 5.4)
Sampson County 2 Rural 137.9 (121.6, 156.1) 27 (3, 80) 54 stable stable trend 1.9 (-6.2, 11.7)
Onslow County 2 Urban 124.1 (112.8, 136.1) 59 (18, 86) 95 stable stable trend 1.8 (-5.4, 10.8)
Guilford County 2 Urban 146.5 (140.4, 152.8) 14 (6, 33) 454 stable stable trend 1.3 (-1.7, 8.3)
Cherokee County 2 Rural 101.3 (85.3, 120.5) 88 (39, 98) 32 stable stable trend 1.1 (-1.8, 4.6)
Johnston County 2 Urban 128.6 (119.2, 138.5) 49 (17, 76) 155 stable stable trend 0.8 (-1.2, 5.7)
Polk County 2 Rural 120.4 (99.1, 146.8) 64 (7, 95) 24 stable stable trend 0.8 (-1.1, 2.8)
Chowan County 2 Rural 155.5 (123.3, 195.1) 7 (1, 86) 17 stable stable trend 0.7 (-1.8, 3.4)
Stokes County 2 Urban 108.7 (93.6, 126.1) 83 (34, 96) 39 stable stable trend 0.4 (-1.1, 2.2)
Warren County 2 Rural 132.6 (108.4, 162.0) 38 (2, 93) 23 stable stable trend 0.4 (-1.4, 2.8)
Bertie County 2 Rural 137.9 (111.2, 170.2) 26 (1, 92) 20 stable stable trend 0.0 (-1.9, 7.1)
Duplin County 2 Rural 140.4 (123.0, 159.9) 22 (3, 78) 49 stable stable trend -0.1 (-1.6, 1.6)
Brunswick County 2 Urban 111.2 (103.4, 119.7) 81 (52, 92) 180 stable stable trend -0.4 (-1.6, 1.2)
Moore County 2 Urban 154.4 (142.0, 167.6) 9 (2, 35) 122 stable stable trend -0.4 (-1.9, 1.1)
Perquimans County 2 Rural 127.1 (99.6, 162.3) 51 (2, 96) 16 stable stable trend -0.4 (-2.4, 1.8)
Pender County 2 Urban 124.2 (109.0, 141.1) 58 (10, 90) 52 stable stable trend -0.5 (-2.0, 1.2)
Wayne County 2 Urban 142.5 (130.1, 155.8) 17 (4, 59) 103 stable stable trend -0.5 (-5.4, 0.7)
New Hanover County 2 Urban 125.7 (117.6, 134.3) 54 (23, 78) 185 stable stable trend -0.6 (-2.0, 0.9)
Stanly County 2 Rural 119.1 (104.9, 135.0) 66 (19, 92) 53 stable stable trend -0.6 (-2.5, 1.5)
Rutherford County 2 Rural 125.2 (111.3, 140.6) 56 (15, 88) 63 stable stable trend -0.7 (-2.6, 1.4)
Union County 2 Urban 139.3 (130.1, 149.0) 23 (9, 57) 185 stable stable trend -0.7 (-1.7, 0.5)
Alexander County 2 Urban 130.8 (111.8, 152.4) 42 (4, 90) 36 stable stable trend -0.9 (-2.7, 0.9)
Bladen County 2 Rural 120.1 (100.5, 143.0) 65 (7, 94) 29 stable stable trend -0.9 (-2.3, 0.6)
Washington County 2 Rural 142.2 (110.7, 183.0) 18 (1, 92) 15 stable stable trend -0.9 (-3.8, 2.0)
Franklin County 2 Urban 137.6 (122.2, 154.5) 28 (5, 77) 63 stable stable trend -1.0 (-3.1, 1.4)
Hyde County 2 Rural 161.8 (105.0, 243.0) 3 (1, 98) 6 stable stable trend -1.0 (-5.4, 3.4)
Rockingham County 2 Urban 118.0 (106.5, 130.6) 71 (28, 90) 82 stable stable trend -1.0 (-1.9, 0.0)
Mitchell County 2 Rural 118.7 (93.8, 150.0) 69 (4, 98) 16 stable stable trend -1.1 (-4.2, 2.1)
Carteret County 2 Rural 83.1 (73.3, 94.2) 97 (87, 99) 55 stable stable trend -1.2 (-4.5, 6.5)
Watauga County 2 Rural 121.2 (104.7, 139.9) 63 (15, 93) 41 stable stable trend -1.2 (-3.1, 0.9)
Columbus County 2 Rural 143.7 (126.1, 163.2) 16 (3, 72) 51 stable stable trend -1.3 (-3.1, 0.5)
Lee County 2 Rural 129.5 (113.8, 146.9) 46 (8, 86) 52 stable stable trend -1.3 (-3.7, 1.3)
Graham County 2 Rural 77.3 (51.0, 116.0) 99 (35, 99) 6 stable stable trend -1.4 (-5.2, 2.4)
Surry County 2 Rural 113.2 (100.3, 127.4) 78 (29, 94) 59 stable stable trend -1.4 (-3.3, 0.4)
Halifax County 2 Rural 140.9 (123.6, 160.2) 20 (3, 77) 51 falling falling trend -1.5 (-2.9, -0.2)
Lincoln County 2 Urban 131.9 (119.4, 145.6) 40 (8, 76) 86 stable stable trend -1.7 (-3.3, 0.1)
Avery County 2 Rural 107.4 (84.7, 135.5) 84 (13, 99) 16 falling falling trend -1.8 (-3.3, -0.2)
Caswell County 2 Rural 130.0 (107.4, 156.9) 44 (3, 93) 25 falling falling trend -1.8 (-3.5, -0.1)
Clay County 2 Rural 118.7 (91.4, 155.1) 68 (4, 98) 14 stable stable trend -1.8 (-5.1, 1.6)
Dare County 2 Rural 111.8 (95.6, 130.7) 80 (21, 95) 37 stable stable trend -1.8 (-3.6, 0.1)
Haywood County 2 Rural 116.9 (104.2, 131.0) 72 (24, 92) 65 falling falling trend -1.8 (-3.3, -0.4)
Wilson County 2 Rural 119.0 (105.6, 133.8) 67 (20, 92) 61 falling falling trend -1.8 (-3.5, -0.1)
Granville County 2 Rural 137.1 (121.3, 154.6) 30 (4, 78) 58 stable stable trend -1.9 (-4.1, 0.5)
Greene County 2 Rural 136.2 (108.6, 169.2) 34 (2, 94) 18 stable stable trend -2.1 (-4.5, 0.2)
Alamance County 2 Urban 125.2 (115.6, 135.4) 55 (22, 83) 131 falling falling trend -2.2 (-4.0, -0.5)
Pasquotank County 2 Rural 128.8 (109.6, 150.7) 48 (5, 90) 34 falling falling trend -2.2 (-3.5, -0.8)
Alleghany County 2 Rural 87.2 (63.7, 119.5) 94 (35, 99) 10 stable stable trend -2.3 (-4.6, 0.1)
Harnett County 2 Rural 118.4 (107.0, 130.8) 70 (27, 89) 83 falling falling trend -2.3 (-3.6, -0.9)
Jackson County 2 Rural 110.9 (94.2, 130.1) 82 (23, 96) 33 stable stable trend -2.3 (-4.6, 0.1)
Jones County 2 Rural 136.4 (101.4, 182.3) 31 (1, 96) 11 stable stable trend -2.3 (-5.2, 0.6)
Macon County 2 Rural 98.5 (84.3, 115.1) 91 (56, 99) 36 falling falling trend -2.4 (-3.6, -1.2)
Rowan County 2 Urban 114.5 (104.9, 124.9) 76 (41, 91) 112 falling falling trend -2.4 (-3.8, -1.3)
Craven County 2 Rural 131.1 (119.2, 144.0) 41 (10, 78) 94 falling falling trend -2.5 (-4.5, -0.6)
Henderson County 2 Urban 114.8 (105.4, 124.9) 75 (38, 91) 116 falling falling trend -2.8 (-4.3, -1.3)
Mecklenburg County 2 Urban 157.7 (152.7, 162.8) 6 (3, 17) 820 stable stable trend -2.8 (-6.3, 0.6)
Randolph County 2 Urban 107.1 (98.0, 116.8) 85 (59, 94) 109 falling falling trend -3.0 (-5.6, -2.3)
Currituck County 2 Urban 84.0 (66.5, 105.3) 96 (69, 99) 17 falling falling trend -3.1 (-5.9, -0.2)
Transylvania County 2 Rural 100.4 (85.1, 118.6) 90 (45, 99) 34 falling falling trend -3.1 (-5.5, -0.8)
Lenoir County 2 Rural 144.7 (127.9, 163.3) 15 (3, 70) 57 falling falling trend -3.5 (-5.5, -1.7)
Madison County 2 Urban 100.7 (79.7, 126.3) 89 (25, 99) 17 falling falling trend -3.5 (-5.5, -1.6)
Gates County 2 Urban 87.7 (61.6, 123.7) 93 (25, 99) 8 stable stable trend -3.6 (-8.1, 0.8)
Cabarrus County 2 Urban 129.5 (120.4, 139.1) 47 (17, 74) 160 stable stable trend -3.9 (-9.5, 1.6)
Camden County 2 Urban 84.8 (56.7, 123.6) 95 (22, 99) 6 falling falling trend -4.0 (-8.0, -0.2)
Wake County 2 Urban 139.0 (134.5, 143.6) 24 (14, 43) 783 falling falling trend -4.5 (-8.2, -0.5)
Wilkes County 2 Rural 80.2 (69.5, 92.3) 98 (87, 99) 42 falling falling trend -4.5 (-6.8, -2.4)
Tyrrell County 2 Rural
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*

Notes:
Created by statecancerprofiles.cancer.gov on 03/13/2026 11:28 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