Return to Home Incidence > Table

Incidence Rates Table

Data Options

Incidence Rate Report for Colorado by County

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

White Non-Hispanic, Both Sexes, All Ages

Sorted by Rate
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
Colorado 6 N/A 400.1 (397.5, 402.6) N/A 20,322 falling falling trend -0.9 (-1.1, -0.7)
US (SEER+NPCR) § 1 N/A 463.1 (462.7, 463.4) N/A 1,300,948 falling falling trend -0.4 (-0.5, -0.2)
Mineral County 6 Rural 178.6 (99.9, 346.0) 62 (37, 62) 3 stable stable trend -1.7 (-8.7, 5.6)
Gilpin County 6 Urban 257.3 (198.7, 329.7) 61 (36, 62) 20 falling falling trend -4.3 (-7.5, -1.1)
Saguache County 6 Rural 265.4 (213.5, 331.6) 60 (37, 62) 22 stable stable trend -1.7 (-4.6, 1.5)
Crowley County 6 Rural 274.4 (209.1, 357.9) 59 (24, 62) 12 stable stable trend -2.3 (-4.8, 0.0)
Conejos County 6 Rural 288.1 (219.6, 372.6) 58 (13, 62) 13 stable stable trend -0.6 (-3.6, 2.5)
Bent County 6 Rural 290.3 (226.9, 370.0) 57 (17, 62) 16 stable stable trend -1.4 (-4.2, 1.3)
Grand County 6 Rural 290.6 (254.2, 331.4) 56 (39, 62) 57 stable stable trend -1.2 (-2.9, 0.6)
Pitkin County 6 Rural 292.5 (260.5, 328.0) 55 (40, 61) 69 falling falling trend -13.6 (-20.0, -7.5)
Clear Creek County 6 Urban 293.0 (250.8, 341.9) 54 (35, 62) 42 stable stable trend 1.2 (-11.6, 9.8)
Summit County 6 Rural 296.8 (268.3, 327.8) 53 (42, 61) 96 stable stable trend 7.9 (-1.6, 21.7)
Yuma County 6 Rural 308.6 (262.0, 362.2) 52 (24, 61) 35 falling falling trend -2.2 (-4.2, -0.3)
Archuleta County 6 Rural 312.4 (272.2, 357.9) 51 (29, 61) 61 falling falling trend -2.0 (-3.5, -0.5)
Custer County 6 Rural 322.3 (257.6, 401.9) 50 (5, 62) 27 falling falling trend -2.1 (-3.7, -0.3)
Lake County 6 Rural 330.4 (263.3, 410.9) 49 (4, 61) 19 falling falling trend -2.4 (-5.6, -0.9)
Kit Carson County 6 Rural 332.7 (277.8, 396.7) 48 (8, 61) 30 stable stable trend -1.0 (-3.2, 1.0)
Logan County 6 Rural 338.0 (304.7, 374.4) 47 (22, 57) 83 falling falling trend -2.6 (-7.9, -1.6)
Eagle County 6 Rural 338.9 (314.2, 365.0) 46 (30, 54) 163 stable stable trend 0.1 (-1.0, 2.4)
Gunnison County 6 Rural 339.8 (298.0, 386.0) 45 (16, 59) 55 falling falling trend -2.1 (-4.0, -0.1)
Rio Grande County 6 Rural 342.8 (288.8, 405.5) 44 (5, 60) 36 stable stable trend -1.6 (-4.1, 0.8)
Park County 6 Urban 344.5 (306.4, 386.7) 43 (14, 56) 82 stable stable trend -1.7 (-3.6, 0.4)
Dolores County 6 Rural 346.0 (255.5, 464.9) 42 (2, 62) 12 stable stable trend 0.4 (-3.1, 4.1)
San Miguel County 6 Rural 346.7 (284.9, 418.5) 41 (3, 60) 28 stable stable trend -1.5 (-4.3, 2.0)
Montezuma County 6 Rural 349.8 (318.1, 384.2) 40 (19, 54) 113 stable stable trend 3.0 (-1.8, 9.7)
Costilla County 6 Rural 352.0 (234.5, 523.5) 39 (1, 62) 9 stable stable trend 0.2 (-6.4, 7.3)
Washington County 6 Rural 352.9 (286.5, 431.8) 38 (3, 60) 23 stable stable trend -1.6 (-4.8, 1.4)
Las Animas County 6 Rural 362.5 (312.9, 419.2) 37 (4, 57) 52 stable stable trend -0.2 (-6.3, 1.4)
Sedgwick County 6 Rural 367.6 (277.9, 485.2) 36 (1, 61) 14 stable stable trend -1.3 (-4.1, 1.1)
Moffat County 6 Rural 375.6 (328.2, 428.2) 35 (3, 54) 51 falling falling trend -2.5 (-3.9, -1.3)
Phillips County 6 Rural 377.0 (298.4, 472.0) 34 (1, 60) 22 stable stable trend -1.6 (-4.5, 1.1)
Alamosa County 6 Rural 379.0 (323.9, 441.3) 33 (2, 54) 38 stable stable trend 0.0 (-1.9, 1.8)
Otero County 6 Rural 381.5 (337.3, 430.6) 32 (3, 51) 64 falling falling trend -1.7 (-3.4, -0.1)
La Plata County 6 Rural 381.6 (359.3, 405.1) 31 (11, 43) 249 rising rising trend 4.7 (1.5, 9.8)
Rio Blanco County 6 Rural 382.2 (316.0, 458.8) 30 (2, 57) 26 stable stable trend -1.3 (-3.0, 0.4)
Baca County 6 Rural 383.3 (308.5, 474.6) 29 (1, 59) 21 stable stable trend -0.4 (-2.6, 1.6)
Elbert County 6 Urban 385.8 (353.1, 421.0) 28 (4, 46) 122 stable stable trend -1.1 (-2.1, 0.0)
Huerfano County 6 Rural 387.4 (318.5, 471.1) 27 (1, 57) 35 stable stable trend -1.9 (-4.4, 0.4)
Montrose County 6 Rural 390.5 (365.3, 417.2) 26 (6, 41) 226 falling falling trend -0.9 (-1.6, -0.2)
Ouray County 6 Rural 392.0 (323.7, 473.9) 25 (1, 56) 32 stable stable trend 0.0 (-2.1, 2.3)
Teller County 6 Urban 392.9 (360.0, 428.5) 24 (4, 44) 139 falling falling trend -1.8 (-3.2, -0.2)
Fremont County 6 Rural 393.0 (370.2, 417.0) 23 (7, 39) 258 falling falling trend -1.9 (-3.1, -1.3)
Delta County 6 Rural 394.3 (366.2, 424.4) 22 (5, 41) 186 falling falling trend -9.7 (-16.9, -4.4)
Morgan County 6 Rural 394.6 (358.3, 434.0) 21 (3, 44) 100 stable stable trend -1.0 (-2.2, 0.2)
El Paso County 6 Urban 394.8 (387.5, 402.2) 20 (14, 34) 2,371 falling falling trend -2.9 (-6.4, -1.3)
Boulder County 6 Urban 397.9 (387.8, 408.1) 19 (11, 34) 1,277 stable stable trend 0.3 (-0.9, 2.4)
Jefferson County 6 Urban 398.9 (391.6, 406.2) 18 (12, 32) 2,502 falling falling trend -0.9 (-1.1, -0.8)
Arapahoe County 6 Urban 399.9 (392.0, 408.0) 17 (11, 31) 2,061 falling falling trend -1.2 (-3.5, -0.8)
Douglas County 6 Urban 400.8 (390.8, 411.0) 16 (10, 32) 1,311 falling falling trend -1.0 (-1.5, -0.2)
Broomfield County 6 Urban 402.9 (381.6, 425.2) 15 (4, 36) 279 falling falling trend -0.7 (-1.3, -0.1)
Routt County 6 Rural 406.1 (371.3, 443.5) 14 (3, 41) 116 stable stable trend -0.6 (-2.0, 1.1)
Garfield County 6 Rural 408.6 (384.0, 434.4) 13 (3, 35) 229 stable stable trend -0.7 (-1.5, 0.2)
Denver County 6 Urban 410.7 (401.9, 419.6) 12 (7, 25) 1,773 falling falling trend -0.8 (-1.1, -0.6)
Chaffee County 6 Rural 412.3 (376.9, 450.9) 11 (2, 40) 122 stable stable trend -0.2 (-1.1, 0.7)
Weld County 6 Urban 419.9 (408.3, 431.7) 10 (3, 21) 1,059 stable stable trend -0.3 (-1.0, 0.4)
Adams County 6 Urban 420.0 (409.4, 430.7) 9 (3, 19) 1,282 falling falling trend -0.7 (-1.1, -0.3)
Mesa County 6 Urban 425.9 (412.0, 440.1) 8 (3, 20) 805 stable stable trend 0.8 (-0.4, 3.1)
Larimer County 6 Urban 426.1 (416.4, 436.0) 7 (3, 17) 1,593 falling falling trend -2.0 (-3.5, -0.5)
Lincoln County 6 Rural 430.2 (358.7, 513.4) 6 (1, 49) 28 stable stable trend 0.3 (-17.3, 4.2)
Pueblo County 6 Urban 431.0 (414.7, 447.8) 5 (2, 19) 610 falling falling trend -1.1 (-4.4, -0.5)
Prowers County 6 Rural 459.7 (399.1, 527.9) 4 (1, 36) 49 stable stable trend -0.2 (-1.7, 1.2)
Kiowa County 6 Rural 464.5 (328.2, 645.2) 3 (1, 61) 10 stable stable trend -0.1 (-3.3, 3.2)
Cheyenne County 6 Rural 503.8 (371.5, 673.6) 2 (1, 55) 11 stable stable trend 1.9 (-2.0, 5.9)
Jackson County 6 Rural 552.5 (400.1, 754.9) 1 (1, 49) 11 stable stable trend 1.8 (-8.5, 13.1)
Hinsdale County 6 Rural
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
San Juan County 6 Rural
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Notes:
Created by statecancerprofiles.cancer.gov on 10/03/2024 5:04 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 (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. 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 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.

Φ Rural-Urban Continuum Codes provided by the USDA.
* 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. If an average count of 3 is shown, the total number of cases for the time period is 16 or more which exceeds suppression threshold (but is rounded to 3).
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 2023 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 2023 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 modified by NCI. The US Population Data File is used with SEER November 2023 data.

Data for the United States does not include data from Indiana.
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