Return to Home Incidence > Table

Incidence Rates Table

Data Options

Incidence Rate Report for Alabama by County

All Cancer Sites (All Stages^), 2016-2020

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

Sorted by Recentaapc
County
 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 ascending
Alabama 6 440.7 (438.3, 443.2) N/A 27,148 falling falling trend -0.6 (-1.1, -0.4)
US (SEER+NPCR) 1 442.3 (442.0, 442.6) N/A 1,698,328 stable stable trend -0.3 (-0.6, 0.1)
Crenshaw County 6 545.8 (497.2, 598.1) 2 (1, 17) 102 rising rising trend 3.9 (1.4, 9.7)
Clarke County 6 476.9 (442.9, 513.1) 11 (2, 51) 158 stable stable trend 3.8 (-0.1, 6.4)
Calhoun County 6 478.7 (462.4, 495.4) 10 (4, 27) 704 rising rising trend 3.1 (1.4, 5.3)
Talladega County 6 465.9 (446.9, 485.5) 18 (6, 40) 488 stable stable trend 2.0 (-1.0, 6.1)
Lowndes County 6 583.5 (524.1, 648.3) 1 (1, 10) 79 stable stable trend 1.7 (0.0, 3.5)
Macon County 6 456.2 (417.1, 498.2) 24 (3, 61) 115 stable stable trend 1.3 (-0.1, 2.8)
Tallapoosa County 6 493.5 (466.9, 521.4) 5 (2, 27) 295 rising rising trend 0.9 (0.4, 1.3)
Colbert County 6 460.4 (438.3, 483.4) 20 (6, 46) 354 stable stable trend 0.8 (0.0, 1.6)
Randolph County 6 419.6 (387.3, 454.1) 50 (13, 65) 138 stable stable trend 0.8 (-0.6, 2.3)
Lamar County 6 482.0 (437.7, 529.9) 9 (2, 54) 97 stable stable trend 0.7 (-1.0, 2.5)
Elmore County 6 507.2 (487.0, 528.1) 4 (2, 15) 501 stable stable trend 0.6 (-0.1, 1.3)
Jackson County 6 438.7 (416.7, 461.7) 38 (13, 60) 324 stable stable trend 0.6 (-0.4, 1.6)
Autauga County 6 487.9 (464.1, 512.7) 7 (2, 28) 327 stable stable trend 0.5 (-0.1, 1.2)
Butler County 6 453.4 (416.5, 493.0) 27 (4, 61) 123 stable stable trend 0.5 (-1.0, 2.0)
Pike County 6 456.1 (424.8, 489.2) 25 (4, 58) 167 stable stable trend 0.5 (-0.4, 1.4)
Walker County 6 519.6 (497.5, 542.5) 3 (1, 11) 454 rising rising trend 0.5 (0.2, 0.8)
Fayette County 6 442.7 (403.9, 484.6) 34 (4, 64) 106 stable stable trend 0.4 (-0.9, 1.8)
Greene County 6 443.1 (387.2, 505.4) 33 (2, 67) 54 stable stable trend 0.4 (-1.7, 2.5)
Montgomery County 6 453.8 (442.0, 465.7) 26 (14, 40) 1,190 stable stable trend 0.4 (0.0, 0.8)
Pickens County 6 491.2 (452.9, 532.1) 6 (1, 43) 133 stable stable trend 0.4 (-0.7, 1.7)
Sumter County 6 460.2 (410.6, 514.5) 21 (2, 63) 73 stable stable trend 0.4 (-5.2, 2.5)
Bibb County 6 471.0 (435.1, 509.3) 14 (3, 53) 132 stable stable trend 0.3 (-0.8, 1.5)
Dallas County 6 468.8 (440.9, 498.0) 15 (3, 47) 234 stable stable trend 0.3 (-0.7, 1.5)
Perry County 6 446.7 (391.6, 507.9) 30 (2, 66) 53 stable stable trend 0.3 (-1.7, 2.2)
Baldwin County 6 444.8 (433.9, 455.9) 31 (18, 47) 1,384 stable stable trend 0.1 (-0.4, 0.7)
Coffee County 6 416.6 (394.2, 439.9) 54 (26, 64) 273 stable stable trend 0.1 (-0.6, 0.9)
Cullman County 6 428.2 (410.4, 446.6) 45 (22, 61) 470 stable stable trend 0.1 (-0.5, 0.8)
Barbour County 6 450.2 (418.4, 484.0) 28 (6, 61) 157 stable stable trend 0.0 (-1.0, 1.0)
Blount County 6 428.1 (407.0, 450.2) 46 (20, 62) 325 stable stable trend 0.0 (-0.9, 1.0)
Cleburne County 6 408.5 (369.2, 451.2) 61 (16, 67) 85 stable stable trend 0.0 (-1.8, 1.9)
Limestone County 6 440.2 (423.0, 457.9) 36 (16, 56) 519 stable stable trend 0.0 (-0.5, 0.7)
Dale County 6 432.1 (408.5, 456.8) 40 (16, 62) 265 stable stable trend -0.1 (-1.0, 0.8)
Etowah County 6 457.1 (440.8, 473.9) 22 (9, 43) 635 stable stable trend -0.1 (-0.8, 0.7)
Franklin County 6 439.8 (410.3, 471.0) 37 (8, 62) 171 stable stable trend -0.1 (-0.7, 0.6)
St. Clair County 6 456.2 (438.3, 474.7) 23 (8, 45) 515 stable stable trend -0.1 (-0.6, 0.5)
Wilcox County 6 476.2 (425.2, 532.1) 13 (1, 62) 70 stable stable trend -0.1 (-1.3, 1.1)
Clay County 6 483.2 (438.3, 531.8) 8 (1, 56) 93 stable stable trend -0.2 (-1.3, 0.8)
Madison County 6 429.3 (420.4, 438.3) 43 (30, 55) 1,879 stable stable trend -0.2 (-0.7, 0.4)
Cherokee County 6 387.2 (358.6, 417.8) 64 (38, 67) 157 stable stable trend -0.3 (-1.5, 0.9)
Lawrence County 6 468.2 (439.2, 498.7) 16 (3, 51) 211 stable stable trend -0.3 (-1.0, 0.5)
Lee County 6 359.2 (345.8, 373.0) 67 (62, 67) 572 stable stable trend -0.3 (-0.9, 0.5)
Russell County 6 376.5 (355.4, 398.6) 65 (54, 67) 250 stable stable trend -0.3 (-2.3, 1.9)
Marshall County 6 429.7 (412.8, 447.1) 42 (22, 60) 517 stable stable trend -0.4 (-0.8, 0.1)
Chilton County 6 409.7 (385.4, 435.1) 60 (29, 66) 225 stable stable trend -0.5 (-1.6, 0.6)
Coosa County 6 390.2 (345.1, 440.2) 63 (17, 67) 64 stable stable trend -0.6 (-2.9, 1.7)
Jefferson County 6 444.0 (437.3, 450.8) 32 (22, 42) 3,533 falling falling trend -0.7 (-1.0, -0.3)
Mobile County 6 428.2 (420.0, 436.6) 44 (31, 56) 2,174 stable stable trend -0.7 (-2.3, 0.8)
Escambia County 6 415.2 (389.2, 442.5) 55 (22, 65) 201 falling falling trend -0.8 (-1.4, -0.3)
Henry County 6 446.8 (409.5, 487.1) 29 (4, 63) 117 stable stable trend -0.8 (-1.6, 0.1)
Houston County 6 433.4 (417.5, 449.9) 39 (20, 58) 591 falling falling trend -0.8 (-1.3, -0.2)
Shelby County 6 402.6 (391.5, 414.1) 62 (49, 64) 1,032 falling falling trend -0.8 (-1.3, -0.3)
Bullock County 6 464.4 (411.4, 522.8) 19 (2, 63) 59 stable stable trend -0.9 (-2.8, 0.3)
Marengo County 6 441.3 (404.2, 481.0) 35 (5, 64) 115 stable stable trend -1.0 (-5.9, 0.2)
Chambers County 6 466.2 (437.7, 496.2) 17 (4, 51) 218 stable stable trend -1.1 (-5.3, 0.3)
DeKalb County 6 370.4 (352.4, 389.1) 66 (59, 67) 336 falling falling trend -1.3 (-2.7, -0.7)
Geneva County 6 430.1 (399.7, 462.3) 41 (11, 64) 162 falling falling trend -1.3 (-5.4, -0.4)
Washington County 6 416.9 (378.3, 458.7) 52 (11, 67) 93 stable stable trend -1.4 (-8.7, 1.0)
Lauderdale County 6 415.1 (398.6, 432.1) 56 (34, 63) 525 falling falling trend -1.5 (-6.3, -0.5)
Morgan County 6 476.5 (460.7, 492.7) 12 (5, 28) 730 stable stable trend -1.5 (-5.3, 0.7)
Winston County 6 419.4 (388.2, 452.6) 51 (15, 65) 150 falling falling trend -1.6 (-3.1, -0.8)
Tuscaloosa County 6 427.9 (415.4, 440.7) 47 (27, 58) 936 falling falling trend -1.7 (-3.8, -1.1)
Monroe County 6 409.8 (376.2, 445.8) 58 (19, 67) 122 falling falling trend -2.5 (-7.1, -0.4)
Conecuh County 6 411.7 (369.0, 458.5) 57 (10, 67) 77 falling falling trend -2.6 (-9.0, -0.7)
Hale County 6 419.8 (379.2, 463.8) 49 (9, 67) 87 falling falling trend -2.8 (-13.3, -0.3)
Marion County 6 422.9 (395.2, 452.2) 48 (17, 65) 187 stable stable trend -3.2 (-6.3, 0.4)
Covington County 6 416.8 (391.5, 443.5) 53 (22, 65) 224 stable stable trend -5.9 (-14.1, 0.9)
Choctaw County 6 409.7 (368.7, 454.6) 59 (11, 67) 82 stable stable trend -7.7 (-15.8, 0.9)
Notes:
Created by statecancerprofiles.cancer.gov on 03/28/2024 5:08 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 (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.
‡ Incidence data come from different sources. Due to different years of data availability, most of the trends are AAPCs based on APCs but some are APCs calculated in SEER*Stat. Please refer to the source for each area for additional information.

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 stage.
⋔ 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.


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 2022 submission.
6 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 2022 submission).
8 Source: Incidence data provided by the SEER Program. AAPCs are calculated by the Joinpoint Regression Program and are based on APCs. Data 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. Population counts for denominators are based on Census populations as modifed by NCI. The US Population Data File is used with SEER November 2022 data.
Data for the United States does not include data from Nevada.
Data for the United States does not include Puerto Rico.

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.

Return to Top