Return to Home Incidence > Table

Incidence Rates Table

Data Options

Incidence Rate Report for Idaho by County

Lung & Bronchus (All Stages^), 2014-2018

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

Sorted by Recentaapc
County
 sort alphabetically by name ascending
Met Healthy People Objective of ***?
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
Idaho 7 *** 49.1 (47.7, 50.6) N/A 960 falling falling trend -1.3 (-1.7, -0.9)
US (SEER+NPCR) 1 *** 57.3 (57.1, 57.4) N/A 222,811 falling falling trend -2.6 (-3.4, -1.8)
Latah County 7 *** 47.9 (38.3, 59.2) 19 (5, 29) 18 stable stable trend 1.3 (-1.0, 3.5)
Fremont County 7 *** 43.0 (29.8, 60.5) 22 (5, 34) 7 stable stable trend 0.7 (-2.3, 3.8)
Adams County 7 *** 38.1 (21.6, 69.9) 24 (3, 34) 3 stable stable trend 0.6 (-5.0, 6.6)
Jefferson County 7 *** 34.7 (25.0, 46.8) 30 (13, 34) 9 stable stable trend 0.3 (-3.0, 3.7)
Clearwater County 7 *** 70.5 (53.6, 93.1) 4 (1, 20) 12 stable stable trend 0.1 (-2.9, 3.1)
Bingham County 7 *** 35.2 (28.0, 43.6) 27 (17, 34) 17 stable stable trend -0.2 (-2.9, 2.5)
Kootenai County 7 *** 64.5 (59.6, 69.7) 6 (2, 10) 132 stable stable trend -0.5 (-1.6, 0.7)
Canyon County 7 *** 54.5 (50.1, 59.2) 9 (6, 18) 117 stable stable trend -0.7 (-1.6, 0.2)
Minidoka County 7 *** 34.9 (25.0, 47.6) 28 (12, 34) 8 stable stable trend -0.7 (-3.2, 1.9)
Cassia County 7 *** 33.1 (23.8, 45.0) 32 (16, 34) 8 stable stable trend -0.8 (-4.1, 2.6)
Bonneville County 7 *** 36.3 (31.4, 41.7) 26 (19, 33) 41 stable stable trend -0.9 (-2.2, 0.4)
Gooding County 7 *** 50.3 (37.2, 66.8) 13 (3, 31) 10 stable stable trend -1.0 (-4.2, 2.4)
Idaho County 7 *** 43.1 (33.5, 55.7) 21 (8, 33) 14 stable stable trend -1.0 (-3.2, 1.2)
Payette County 7 *** 60.8 (49.2, 74.7) 7 (1, 21) 19 stable stable trend -1.0 (-3.3, 1.4)
Bannock County 7 *** 36.5 (31.0, 42.7) 25 (18, 33) 33 stable stable trend -1.1 (-2.9, 0.6)
Power County 7 *** 34.5 (19.9, 56.5) 31 (7, 34) 3 stable stable trend -1.1 (-5.4, 3.5)
Shoshone County 7 *** 80.5 (64.0, 100.9) 1 (1, 10) 17 stable stable trend -1.3 (-2.8, 0.4)
Elmore County 7 *** 72.0 (58.2, 88.2) 2 (1, 14) 19 stable stable trend -1.5 (-3.9, 1.0)
Nez Perce County 7 *** 67.3 (58.1, 77.7) 5 (1, 12) 40 falling falling trend -1.5 (-2.8, -0.2)
Benewah County 7 *** 58.7 (42.2, 80.8) 8 (1, 29) 9 stable stable trend -1.8 (-5.2, 1.8)
Blaine County 7 *** 31.4 (22.2, 43.3) 33 (17, 34) 8 stable stable trend -1.9 (-5.2, 1.5)
Boise County 7 *** 48.5 (32.2, 73.2) 16 (2, 34) 7 stable stable trend -1.9 (-5.6, 2.0)
Jerome County 7 *** 47.6 (35.9, 62.0) 20 (4, 31) 11 stable stable trend -1.9 (-4.9, 1.3)
Ada County 7 *** 49.9 (47.0, 52.9) 14 (9, 21) 231 falling falling trend -2.0 (-2.7, -1.3)
Bonner County 7 *** 51.9 (44.5, 60.4) 10 (6, 23) 38 falling falling trend -2.0 (-3.1, -0.8)
Boundary County 7 *** 49.7 (35.8, 68.0) 15 (2, 32) 9 stable stable trend -2.0 (-4.1, 0.3)
Twin Falls County 7 *** 48.3 (42.3, 55.0) 17 (8, 24) 47 falling falling trend -2.0 (-2.9, -1.1)
Gem County 7 *** 51.2 (39.9, 65.3) 11 (3, 29) 14 falling falling trend -2.9 (-5.3, -0.6)
Lewis County 7 *** 70.7 (45.0, 110.3) 3 (1, 31) 5 stable stable trend -3.0 (-6.2, 0.4)
Lemhi County 7 *** 47.9 (33.7, 68.8) 18 (3, 33) 8 falling falling trend -3.1 (-5.6, -0.7)
Washington County 7 *** 50.9 (36.7, 70.1) 12 (2, 32) 9 falling falling trend -3.9 (-6.7, -1.0)
Owyhee County 7 *** 34.7 (22.5, 51.7) 29 (10, 34) 5 falling falling trend -4.1 (-7.5, -0.6)
Valley County 7 *** 25.5 (15.6, 40.8) 34 (20, 34) 5 falling falling trend -5.3 (-9.4, -1.1)
Custer County 7 *** 39.0 (22.4, 69.3) 23 (3, 34) 3
*
*
Bear Lake County 7 ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Butte County 7 ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Camas County 7 ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Caribou County 7 ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Clark County 7 ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Franklin County 7 ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Lincoln County 7 ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Madison County 7 ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Oneida County 7 ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Teton County 7 ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Notes:
Created by statecancerprofiles.cancer.gov on 10/05/2022 2:06 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.
Bear Lake, Butte, Camas, Caribou, Clark, Franklin, Lincoln, Madison, Oneida, Teton

† 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 1969-2018 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 stage.
* 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).

Source: SEER and NPCR data. For more specific information please see the table.

Interpret Rankings provides insight into interpreting cancer incidence statistics. When the population size for a denominator is small, the rates may be unstable. A rate is unstable when a small change in the numerator (e.g., only one or two additional cases) has a dramatic effect on the calculated rate.

Data for 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