Return to Home Incidence > Table

Incidence Rates Table

Data Options

Incidence Rate Report for Indiana by County

Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma (All Stages^), 2015-2019

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

Sorted by Count
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 ascending
Recent Trend
Recent 5-Year Trend in Incidence Rates
(95% Confidence Interval)
 sort by trend descending
Indiana 6 18.3 (17.8, 18.7) N/A 1,417 falling falling trend -4.3 (-6.9, -1.7)
US (SEER+NPCR) 1 19.0 (18.9, 19.0) N/A 71,841 falling falling trend -1.8 (-2.4, -1.3)
Marion County 6 18.8 (17.5, 20.1) 36 (18, 56) 178 falling falling trend -2.3 (-3.9, -0.6)
Lake County 6 19.4 (17.7, 21.1) 28 (12, 56) 112 stable stable trend 0.4 (-0.5, 1.2)
Allen County 6 17.1 (15.4, 19.1) 54 (22, 71) 71 falling falling trend -1.9 (-3.4, -0.3)
St. Joseph County 6 18.0 (15.9, 20.3) 45 (16, 69) 58 stable stable trend -0.9 (-2.3, 0.5)
Hamilton County 6 17.8 (15.7, 20.0) 49 (16, 69) 56 stable stable trend -1.3 (-3.0, 0.5)
Elkhart County 6 17.7 (15.2, 20.4) 50 (13, 71) 39 falling falling trend -2.0 (-3.7, -0.2)
Johnson County 6 22.4 (19.3, 25.9) 9 (2, 49) 38 stable stable trend -0.7 (-2.4, 1.0)
Porter County 6 19.1 (16.4, 22.1) 31 (8, 68) 38 stable stable trend -0.8 (-2.0, 0.5)
Vanderburgh County 6 16.0 (13.7, 18.6) 63 (25, 76) 37 stable stable trend -0.7 (-2.3, 0.9)
Madison County 6 20.5 (17.4, 24.0) 20 (3, 61) 34 stable stable trend -0.4 (-2.4, 1.6)
Tippecanoe County 6 18.4 (15.5, 21.6) 42 (8, 72) 31 falling falling trend -2.4 (-4.4, -0.4)
Hendricks County 6 16.0 (13.4, 18.9) 64 (24, 78) 28 falling falling trend -5.7 (-8.9, -2.4)
Delaware County 6 19.0 (15.9, 22.6) 32 (6, 70) 27 stable stable trend -0.4 (-2.4, 1.7)
Vigo County 6 21.1 (17.5, 25.1) 16 (2, 64) 26 stable stable trend -0.2 (-2.2, 1.9)
LaPorte County 6 17.6 (14.5, 21.2) 51 (10, 76) 24 stable stable trend -0.7 (-1.7, 0.3)
Monroe County 6 17.2 (14.2, 20.7) 53 (12, 76) 24 stable stable trend -2.2 (-4.2, 0.0)
Clark County 6 16.0 (13.1, 19.4) 62 (18, 78) 22 stable stable trend -22.1 (-43.7, 7.9)
Bartholomew County 6 22.5 (18.4, 27.2) 8 (1, 60) 22 stable stable trend 0.8 (-2.0, 3.6)
Howard County 6 20.2 (16.4, 24.6) 21 (3, 71) 22 stable stable trend -1.1 (-2.7, 0.6)
Morgan County 6 21.9 (17.6, 27.0) 14 (1, 67) 20 stable stable trend -0.7 (-3.0, 1.7)
Floyd County 6 20.1 (16.2, 24.8) 22 (2, 71) 19 stable stable trend -0.2 (-2.3, 1.8)
Grant County 6 19.8 (15.8, 24.6) 25 (3, 73) 18 stable stable trend -0.8 (-3.7, 2.1)
Kosciusko County 6 17.5 (14.0, 21.8) 52 (7, 77) 17 stable stable trend -1.8 (-4.7, 1.3)
Hancock County 6 18.4 (14.6, 22.9) 39 (5, 76) 17 stable stable trend -1.9 (-4.2, 0.5)
Wayne County 6 17.8 (14.0, 22.5) 48 (6, 77) 16 stable stable trend -0.8 (-3.2, 1.7)
Warrick County 6 19.5 (15.2, 24.7) 26 (3, 75) 15 stable stable trend -0.1 (-3.9, 3.9)
Boone County 6 18.6 (14.2, 23.9) 37 (4, 77) 13 stable stable trend -0.4 (-4.0, 3.3)
Lawrence County 6 19.3 (14.8, 25.0) 29 (2, 76) 13 stable stable trend 0.3 (-2.9, 3.6)
Shelby County 6 22.0 (16.8, 28.4) 12 (1, 72) 13 stable stable trend 0.7 (-1.8, 3.3)
Henry County 6 19.0 (14.4, 24.6) 34 (3, 78) 12 stable stable trend -2.0 (-4.3, 0.3)
DeKalb County 6 22.9 (17.3, 29.9) 6 (1, 71) 12 stable stable trend -0.3 (-4.0, 3.6)
Marshall County 6 17.9 (13.3, 23.7) 47 (3, 80) 11 stable stable trend -1.4 (-3.7, 1.0)
Harrison County 6 20.8 (15.3, 27.6) 19 (1, 76) 10 stable stable trend 0.5 (-2.3, 3.4)
Dearborn County 6 15.8 (11.6, 21.2) 65 (9, 82) 10 stable stable trend -0.7 (-4.2, 3.0)
Montgomery County 6 18.0 (13.1, 24.2) 46 (3, 81) 9 stable stable trend -1.4 (-4.7, 1.9)
Wabash County 6 19.0 (13.7, 25.8) 33 (2, 80) 9 stable stable trend -0.4 (-3.3, 2.5)
Whitley County 6 22.1 (16.0, 29.9) 11 (1, 74) 9 stable stable trend 2.5 (-0.7, 5.8)
Dubois County 6 15.6 (11.3, 21.3) 68 (7, 82) 9 stable stable trend -1.2 (-3.9, 1.5)
Knox County 6 18.9 (13.7, 25.7) 35 (2, 79) 9 stable stable trend 0.8 (-2.6, 4.3)
Greene County 6 18.5 (13.2, 25.3) 38 (2, 80) 9 stable stable trend -1.1 (-5.5, 3.5)
Jackson County 6 15.6 (11.2, 21.2) 70 (8, 82) 9 stable stable trend -2.2 (-5.2, 0.9)
Jasper County 6 21.0 (14.9, 28.7) 18 (1, 78) 8 stable stable trend 0.9 (-3.5, 5.5)
Daviess County 6 21.7 (15.5, 29.7) 15 (1, 77) 8 stable stable trend 0.4 (-2.2, 3.1)
White County 6 21.9 (15.5, 30.6) 13 (1, 76) 8 stable stable trend -0.5 (-3.5, 2.6)
Posey County 6 23.2 (16.2, 32.5) 5 (1, 76) 8 stable stable trend 3.6 (-2.0, 9.5)
Clinton County 6 19.4 (13.6, 27.0) 27 (1, 80) 8 stable stable trend -0.8 (-4.2, 2.9)
Gibson County 6 17.0 (12.0, 23.7) 55 (3, 82) 8 stable stable trend -1.2 (-4.3, 2.1)
Jennings County 6 22.1 (15.4, 31.0) 10 (1, 78) 7 stable stable trend -0.5 (-4.8, 4.1)
Putnam County 6 15.7 (10.9, 22.0) 66 (7, 82) 7 stable stable trend 0.3 (-2.9, 3.5)
Tipton County 6 31.1 (20.9, 44.9) 1 (1, 63) 7 stable stable trend 1.9 (-3.2, 7.2)
Cass County 6 12.6 (8.5, 18.0) 77 (24, 82) 6 stable stable trend -0.8 (-4.7, 3.2)
LaGrange County 6 16.2 (11.0, 23.0) 61 (4, 82) 6 stable stable trend -0.5 (-3.9, 3.1)
Huntington County 6 13.1 (8.8, 18.8) 75 (17, 82) 6 falling falling trend -4.3 (-7.7, -0.8)
Jefferson County 6 15.6 (10.5, 22.5) 69 (4, 82) 6 stable stable trend -1.3 (-4.0, 1.5)
Steuben County 6 12.9 (8.4, 19.0) 76 (17, 82) 6 stable stable trend -3.3 (-7.5, 1.1)
Wells County 6 18.3 (12.1, 26.6) 43 (1, 82) 6 stable stable trend -0.8 (-4.8, 3.4)
Fayette County 6 18.4 (12.1, 27.1) 41 (1, 82) 6 stable stable trend -2.0 (-5.7, 1.8)
Fountain County 6 24.6 (16.3, 36.1) 4 (1, 77) 6 stable stable trend -2.0 (-5.9, 2.2)
Owen County 6 20.0 (13.2, 29.4) 23 (1, 81) 6 stable stable trend -1.4 (-6.1, 3.6)
Clay County 6 17.0 (11.2, 24.9) 56 (3, 82) 6 stable stable trend -0.8 (-5.1, 3.8)
Jay County 6 21.1 (13.9, 30.9) 17 (1, 81) 6 stable stable trend -0.4 (-4.6, 4.0)
Noble County 6 10.8 (7.1, 15.8) 82 (42, 82) 6 stable stable trend -3.0 (-6.7, 0.7)
Spencer County 6 19.1 (12.4, 28.4) 30 (1, 82) 6 stable stable trend -1.5 (-5.4, 2.6)
Decatur County 6 16.3 (10.6, 24.1) 60 (3, 82) 5 stable stable trend -0.9 (-5.4, 3.9)
Scott County 6 18.3 (11.9, 27.1) 44 (1, 82) 5 stable stable trend 0.4 (-4.0, 4.9)
Brown County 6 22.8 (14.1, 35.6) 7 (1, 81) 5 stable stable trend 0.0 (-5.3, 5.7)
Miami County 6 11.2 (7.2, 16.7) 81 (32, 82) 5 stable stable trend -2.1 (-6.0, 1.9)
Randolph County 6 15.1 (9.6, 22.8) 73 (5, 82) 5 stable stable trend -2.2 (-6.4, 2.2)
Adams County 6 12.4 (7.8, 18.6) 78 (16, 82) 5 stable stable trend -2.5 (-6.5, 1.7)
Fulton County 6 15.7 (9.9, 24.1) 67 (3, 82) 5 stable stable trend -3.3 (-7.1, 0.7)
Orange County 6 16.4 (10.2, 25.4) 58 (2, 82) 5 stable stable trend -0.9 (-5.2, 3.7)
Ripley County 6 11.5 (7.2, 17.6) 80 (30, 82) 5 stable stable trend -2.9 (-6.7, 1.1)
Washington County 6 13.7 (8.5, 20.9) 74 (8, 82) 5 stable stable trend -1.0 (-5.2, 3.4)
Blackford County 6 25.8 (15.8, 40.4) 2 (1, 81) 4
*
*
Vermillion County 6 19.9 (12.3, 31.0) 24 (1, 82) 4
*
*
Carroll County 6 15.5 (9.2, 24.6) 71 (2, 82) 4
*
*
Perry County 6 15.4 (9.3, 24.6) 72 (3, 82) 4
*
*
Crawford County 6 25.1 (14.5, 41.1) 3 (1, 81) 4 stable stable trend 5.0 (-0.1, 10.4)
Rush County 6 16.6 (9.6, 27.2) 57 (1, 82) 4
*
*
Starke County 6 11.9 (6.8, 19.6) 79 (13, 82) 3 stable stable trend -3.8 (-8.5, 1.1)
Pike County 6 16.4 (9.2, 28.0) 59 (1, 82) 3
*
*
Pulaski County 6 18.4 (10.3, 30.9) 40 (1, 82) 3 stable stable trend -2.7 (-5.9, 0.6)
Benton County 6
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Franklin County 6
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Martin County 6
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Newton County 6
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Ohio County 6
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Parke County 6
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Sullivan County 6
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Switzerland County 6
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Union County 6
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Warren County 6
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Notes:
Created by statecancerprofiles.cancer.gov on 05/30/2023 11:15 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.
Benton, Franklin, Martin, Newton, Ohio, Parke, Sullivan, Switzerland, Union, Warren

⋔ 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.

† 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 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 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