Return to Home Incidence > Table

Incidence Rates Table

Data Options

Incidence Rate Report by State

All Cancer Sites (All Stages^), 2017-2021

All Races (includes Hispanic), Both Sexes, Ages <50

Sorted by Recentaapc
State
 sort alphabetically by name ascending
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
US (SEER+NPCR) 1 104.6 (104.4, 104.8) N/A 205,200 stable stable trend 0.0 (-0.2, 0.2)
Puerto Rico 6 105.2 (103.0, 107.4) N/A 1,794 stable stable trend -3.6 (-10.6, 4.0)
Massachusetts 7 99.0 (97.6, 100.3) 39 (35, 43) 4,248 falling falling trend -2.7 (-5.1, -1.2)
Pennsylvania 6 109.7 (108.7, 110.8) 13 (10, 19) 8,236 falling falling trend -2.2 (-2.9, -1.6)
New Hampshire 6 107.9 (104.6, 111.2) 20 (8, 35) 849 falling falling trend -1.9 (-3.9, -0.3)
Michigan 6 104.3 (103.1, 105.5) 32 (24, 36) 6,079 falling falling trend -1.8 (-2.9, -0.4)
Oregon 6 97.5 (95.8, 99.2) 42 (39, 46) 2,543 falling falling trend -1.8 (-5.1, -0.2)
Arizona 6 94.9 (93.5, 96.2) 46 (43, 49) 3,971 falling falling trend -1.5 (-2.4, -0.9)
Arkansas 6 106.6 (104.4, 108.8) 25 (14, 35) 1,883 stable stable trend -1.3 (-3.9, 0.0)
District of Columbia 6 99.4 (95.2, 103.7) 40 (27, 49) 456 falling falling trend -1.2 (-2.1, -0.3)
Rhode Island 6 103.6 (100.1, 107.3) 34 (16, 42) 662 falling falling trend -1.2 (-2.8, -0.7)
South Carolina 6 102.0 (100.3, 103.6) 36 (31, 41) 3,028 falling falling trend -0.8 (-1.9, -0.3)
Delaware 6 110.0 (106.1, 114.0) 12 (3, 32) 607 stable stable trend -0.5 (-3.1, 0.1)
Kentucky 7 121.1 (119.3, 123.0) 2 (1, 2) 3,313 stable stable trend -0.4 (-2.5, 0.8)
Virginia 6 95.2 (94.0, 96.4) 45 (42, 49) 5,058 falling falling trend -0.4 (-1.6, -0.1)
Hawaii 7 105.1 (102.1, 108.2) 21 (11, 37) 926 stable stable trend -0.3 (-3.3, 0.5)
Tennessee 6 105.7 (104.3, 107.1) 28 (18, 35) 4,392 stable stable trend -0.3 (-0.6, 0.0)
New Jersey 7 108.1 (106.9, 109.3) 15 (11, 20) 6,256 stable stable trend -0.2 (-1.3, 0.1)
Mississippi 6 104.6 (102.5, 106.8) 31 (18, 38) 1,822 stable stable trend -0.1 (-1.6, 0.3)
Washington 5 101.5 (100.2, 102.8) 38 (33, 41) 4,847 stable stable trend -0.1 (-0.3, 0.1)
Maryland 6 103.5 (102.1, 105.0) 35 (26, 38) 3,915 stable stable trend 0.0 (-0.2, 0.2)
North Carolina 6 107.9 (106.8, 109.1) 19 (14, 26) 6,833 stable stable trend 0.0 (-0.3, 0.2)
Vermont 6 113.5 (108.6, 118.5) 8 (3, 24) 408 stable stable trend 0.0 (-0.4, 0.3)
Alaska 6 97.1 (93.0, 101.3) 44 (33, 50) 441 stable stable trend 0.1 (-0.4, 0.6)
Idaho 7 100.1 (97.5, 102.8) 37 (27, 43) 1,088 stable stable trend 0.1 (-2.5, 0.6)
Kansas 6 108.7 (106.4, 110.9) 17 (9, 28) 1,855 stable stable trend 0.1 (-0.4, 0.3)
Nevada 6 91.1 (89.2, 93.1) 50 (48, 50) 1,752 stable stable trend 0.1 (-0.3, 0.5)
New York 7 112.8 (112.0, 113.7) 5 (3, 9) 14,037 stable stable trend 0.1 (-0.1, 0.3)
Wisconsin 6 106.5 (105.0, 108.1) 23 (16, 32) 3,615 stable stable trend 0.1 (-0.3, 0.4)
Wyoming 6 97.3 (92.7, 102.2) 43 (31, 50) 328 stable stable trend 0.1 (-0.5, 0.8)
Colorado 6 94.7 (93.3, 96.1) 48 (43, 49) 3,491 stable stable trend 0.2 (-0.1, 0.4)
Missouri 6 105.4 (103.9, 107.0) 29 (19, 35) 3,780 stable stable trend 0.2 (-1.1, 0.4)
Texas 7 97.6 (96.9, 98.2) 41 (39, 44) 18,417 stable stable trend 0.2 (0.0, 0.3)
California 7 93.5 (93.0, 94.0) 47 (43, 49) 23,876 rising rising trend 0.3 (0.2, 0.4)
Georgia 7 105.0 (103.9, 106.1) 24 (18, 31) 7,177 stable stable trend 0.3 (-0.5, 0.5)
Illinois 7 104.4 (103.4, 105.4) 26 (19, 32) 8,382 stable stable trend 0.3 (-0.1, 0.5)
Alabama 6 105.6 (103.9, 107.3) 27 (18, 35) 3,119 rising rising trend 0.4 (0.1, 0.7)
Florida 6 112.2 (111.4, 113.1) 10 (6, 13) 14,005 rising rising trend 0.4 (0.2, 0.5)
Iowa 7 112.9 (110.7, 115.1) 4 (3, 12) 2,093 stable stable trend 0.5 (-1.4, 0.9)
New Mexico 7 93.2 (90.8, 95.7) 49 (42, 50) 1,151 rising rising trend 0.5 (0.3, 0.7)
Oklahoma 6 104.1 (102.2, 105.9) 33 (22, 39) 2,432 stable stable trend 0.5 (0.0, 0.9)
North Dakota 6 104.8 (100.5, 109.2) 30 (11, 42) 459 stable stable trend 0.6 (-1.6, 1.4)
Ohio 6 112.0 (110.9, 113.1) 11 (6, 14) 7,702 stable stable trend 0.6 (-0.1, 0.8)
West Virginia 6 124.5 (121.5, 127.6) 1 (1, 2) 1,300 stable stable trend 0.6 (-1.1, 0.9)
Minnesota 6 114.4 (112.8, 116.0) 7 (3, 11) 3,861 stable stable trend 0.7 (-0.5, 1.0)
Montana 6 109.0 (105.3, 112.8) 18 (5, 35) 662 rising rising trend 0.7 (0.2, 1.2)
Utah 7 105.1 (103.1, 107.1) 22 (14, 34) 2,194 stable stable trend 0.7 (-0.1, 1.2)
Louisiana 7 110.6 (108.9, 112.4) 9 (4, 15) 3,100 rising rising trend 0.8 (0.6, 1.0)
South Dakota 6 109.3 (105.2, 113.5) 16 (4, 34) 535 rising rising trend 0.9 (0.5, 1.2)
Nebraska 6 114.4 (111.6, 117.2) 6 (3, 14) 1,307 stable stable trend 1.5 (-1.1, 3.5)
Connecticut 7 108.1 (106.2, 110.1) 14 (8, 24) 2,344 stable stable trend 1.9 (-0.4, 3.3)
Maine 6 115.2 (111.8, 118.7) 3 (3, 14) 881 rising rising trend 2.3 (0.7, 3.3)
Indiana 6
data not available
N/A
data not available
data not available
data not available
Notes:
Created by statecancerprofiles.cancer.gov on 10/14/2024 4:58 pm.

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.
Indiana

† 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/Historic Combined Summary Stage (2004+).
⋔ 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. More information about methodology can be found on the CI*Rank website.

Data not available for this combination of data selections.
Source: SEER and NPCR data. For more specific information please see the table.

Data for the United States does not include data from Indiana.
Data for the United States does not include Puerto Rico.
CI*Rank data for Puerto Rico is not available.

Return to Top