Return to Home Incidence > Table

Incidence Rates Table

Data Options

Incidence Rate Report for Michigan by County

Prostate (All Stages^), 2014-2018

All Races (includes Hispanic), Male, All Ages

Sorted by Rate
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 ascending
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
Michigan 5 *** 107.3 (106.1, 108.5) N/A 6,764 stable stable trend 2.4 (-2.9, 7.9)
US (SEER+NPCR) 1 *** 106.2 (106.0, 106.4) N/A 200,677 stable stable trend 1.8 (-2.6, 6.3)
Grand Traverse County 6 *** 136.8 (123.9, 150.8) 1 (1, 15) 89 stable stable trend 5.8 (-5.6, 18.6)
Delta County 6 *** 135.9 (117.7, 156.6) 2 (1, 27) 42 stable stable trend 14.3 (-3.6, 35.5)
Wayne County 7 *** 134.0 (130.7, 137.4) 3 (1, 8) 1,327 stable stable trend 1.0 (-5.3, 7.8)
Oakland County 7 *** 130.1 (126.5, 133.9) 4 (1, 11) 1,009 stable stable trend 4.1 (-3.9, 12.7)
Baraga County 6 *** 124.2 (89.1, 170.7) 5 (1, 78) 9 stable stable trend 32.4 (-1.7, 78.2)
Washtenaw County 6 *** 121.4 (114.1, 128.9) 6 (3, 23) 225 falling falling trend -3.7 (-5.2, -2.1)
Clinton County 6 *** 120.0 (106.5, 134.7) 7 (1, 39) 61 falling falling trend -8.7 (-13.3, -3.8)
Benzie County 6 *** 118.9 (95.7, 147.5) 8 (1, 63) 19 stable stable trend 8.8 (-3.3, 22.5)
Eaton County 6 *** 118.6 (107.4, 130.7) 9 (2, 35) 88 falling falling trend -4.9 (-6.8, -2.9)
Missaukee County 6 *** 117.9 (91.4, 151.1) 10 (1, 70) 14 stable stable trend -3.5 (-7.0, 0.1)
Sanilac County 6 *** 117.3 (100.9, 136.1) 11 (1, 51) 38 stable stable trend -2.4 (-4.9, 0.1)
Saginaw County 6 *** 116.2 (107.8, 125.0) 12 (4, 32) 150 stable stable trend 1.7 (-5.1, 9.0)
St. Clair County 6 *** 116.0 (107.0, 125.7) 13 (4, 34) 130 falling falling trend -2.9 (-4.7, -1.1)
Alger County 6 *** 115.6 (86.0, 155.5) 14 (1, 76) 11 stable stable trend -1.9 (-5.0, 1.4)
Menominee County 6 *** 114.6 (94.5, 138.7) 15 (1, 64) 24 stable stable trend -0.9 (-4.7, 2.9)
Leelanau County 6 *** 114.0 (93.9, 138.6) 16 (1, 62) 26 falling falling trend -5.1 (-7.7, -2.5)
Ogemaw County 6 *** 113.4 (92.9, 138.5) 17 (1, 66) 22 stable stable trend -2.1 (-5.5, 1.4)
Oscoda County 6 *** 113.4 (82.3, 156.8) 18 (1, 79) 10 stable stable trend -0.2 (-3.7, 3.4)
Macomb County 7 *** 113.1 (109.1, 117.3) 19 (9, 28) 611 stable stable trend 2.3 (-6.2, 11.5)
Ontonagon County 6 *** 112.5 (79.7, 166.8) 20 (1, 80) 9 stable stable trend -0.9 (-4.4, 2.6)
Kalkaska County 6 *** 112.3 (88.6, 141.7) 21 (1, 71) 16 falling falling trend -3.9 (-7.4, -0.3)
Antrim County 6 *** 112.1 (93.0, 135.4) 22 (1, 63) 25 falling falling trend -5.1 (-7.1, -3.1)
Roscommon County 6 *** 111.9 (94.7, 133.2) 23 (1, 61) 32 falling falling trend -4.9 (-6.5, -3.4)
Ingham County 6 *** 110.9 (103.1, 119.2) 24 (7, 40) 162 falling falling trend -7.6 (-11.4, -3.7)
Livingston County 6 *** 110.9 (102.4, 119.9) 25 (7, 40) 140 stable stable trend 3.1 (-4.3, 11.0)
Shiawassee County 6 *** 107.2 (94.0, 122.0) 26 (5, 60) 50 falling falling trend -3.5 (-5.6, -1.4)
Genesee County 6 *** 106.8 (101.2, 112.8) 27 (13, 40) 277 stable stable trend -0.1 (-10.8, 11.9)
Berrien County 6 *** 106.1 (97.4, 115.4) 28 (9, 48) 115 falling falling trend -5.6 (-6.8, -4.4)
Kalamazoo County 6 *** 102.7 (95.2, 110.7) 29 (14, 50) 147 stable stable trend 5.1 (-4.9, 16.1)
Otsego County 6 *** 102.3 (82.8, 125.9) 30 (3, 75) 20 falling falling trend -5.1 (-7.8, -2.4)
Clare County 6 *** 101.2 (84.5, 121.1) 31 (5, 72) 27 falling falling trend -4.2 (-6.6, -1.7)
Huron County 6 *** 100.8 (84.6, 120.0) 32 (5, 73) 28 falling falling trend -5.5 (-7.4, -3.5)
Osceola County 6 *** 100.7 (81.3, 124.2) 33 (3, 76) 19 falling falling trend -11.3 (-16.1, -6.2)
Van Buren County 6 *** 100.4 (88.1, 114.0) 34 (10, 65) 52 falling falling trend -5.0 (-6.6, -3.4)
Lapeer County 6 *** 100.1 (88.9, 112.6) 35 (11, 63) 63 falling falling trend -4.5 (-6.7, -2.2)
Marquette County 6 *** 99.6 (87.3, 113.5) 36 (10, 66) 50 falling falling trend -2.2 (-4.3, -0.1)
Gladwin County 6 *** 99.1 (81.8, 120.1) 37 (4, 76) 24 falling falling trend -4.4 (-6.7, -2.1)
Midland County 6 *** 99.1 (87.5, 111.8) 38 (11, 65) 55 falling falling trend -5.4 (-7.8, -2.9)
Mason County 6 *** 98.0 (80.7, 118.6) 39 (6, 76) 24 falling falling trend -3.5 (-5.6, -1.2)
Jackson County 6 *** 97.3 (88.8, 106.4) 40 (18, 61) 102 falling falling trend -6.4 (-9.0, -3.7)
Wexford County 6 *** 96.3 (79.5, 116.1) 41 (6, 76) 24 falling falling trend -7.0 (-8.6, -5.4)
Lenawee County 6 *** 94.8 (84.4, 106.3) 42 (17, 69) 63 falling falling trend -4.8 (-6.5, -3.1)
Muskegon County 6 *** 92.9 (84.9, 101.6) 43 (24, 67) 104 falling falling trend -5.9 (-7.6, -4.2)
Tuscola County 6 *** 91.6 (78.8, 106.3) 44 (14, 76) 38 falling falling trend -5.3 (-7.4, -3.2)
Barry County 6 *** 91.4 (78.8, 105.7) 45 (16, 76) 40 falling falling trend -3.3 (-5.6, -1.0)
Bay County 6 *** 91.4 (81.7, 102.0) 46 (23, 72) 68 falling falling trend -3.5 (-5.6, -1.4)
Luce County 6 *** 91.2 (58.1, 139.5) 47 (1, 82) 5 stable stable trend -4.2 (-9.0, 0.7)
Arenac County 6 *** 90.7 (69.5, 118.4) 48 (5, 81) 13 falling falling trend -5.4 (-8.4, -2.3)
Ottawa County 6 *** 90.3 (83.6, 97.4) 49 (31, 67) 142 falling falling trend -4.8 (-6.5, -3.2)
Montcalm County 6 *** 89.9 (77.2, 104.1) 50 (18, 77) 38 falling falling trend -5.4 (-7.5, -3.3)
Monroe County 6 *** 89.4 (80.9, 98.5) 51 (30, 71) 88 stable stable trend -2.3 (-4.9, 0.4)
Allegan County 6 *** 89.2 (79.5, 99.8) 52 (26, 74) 67 falling falling trend -4.8 (-6.3, -3.4)
Charlevoix County 6 *** 88.6 (71.3, 109.7) 53 (9, 81) 20 falling falling trend -4.3 (-6.8, -1.7)
Houghton County 6 *** 88.4 (71.8, 108.1) 54 (13, 81) 20 stable stable trend 4.9 (-5.3, 16.3)
Chippewa County 6 *** 87.8 (72.1, 106.2) 55 (16, 80) 23 falling falling trend -3.7 (-6.5, -0.7)
Crawford County 6 *** 87.1 (66.3, 115.0) 56 (7, 82) 12 falling falling trend -4.3 (-7.2, -1.2)
Hillsdale County 6 *** 85.9 (72.0, 102.1) 57 (19, 80) 28 stable stable trend 7.4 (-3.0, 18.9)
Ionia County 6 *** 85.2 (72.2, 99.9) 58 (22, 80) 33 falling falling trend -4.9 (-7.0, -2.8)
Kent County 6 *** 85.0 (80.5, 89.7) 59 (44, 71) 290 stable stable trend -0.9 (-8.2, 6.9)
Presque Isle County 6 *** 84.3 (62.5, 114.5) 60 (6, 82) 12 falling falling trend -5.8 (-7.9, -3.6)
Manistee County 6 *** 84.3 (67.9, 104.5) 61 (17, 81) 19 falling falling trend -6.4 (-8.5, -4.4)
Mecosta County 6 *** 84.1 (69.5, 101.3) 62 (20, 81) 24 falling falling trend -5.9 (-8.9, -2.8)
Cheboygan County 6 *** 83.9 (68.3, 103.3) 63 (19, 81) 21 falling falling trend -5.6 (-8.1, -3.0)
Cass County 6 *** 83.9 (71.2, 98.5) 64 (24, 80) 33 falling falling trend -3.2 (-5.4, -0.9)
Emmet County 6 *** 83.4 (68.1, 101.7) 65 (20, 81) 22 falling falling trend -4.7 (-7.2, -2.2)
Alpena County 6 *** 79.1 (63.7, 97.8) 66 (25, 82) 19 falling falling trend -4.7 (-7.3, -1.9)
Dickinson County 6 *** 78.9 (62.4, 99.2) 67 (21, 82) 16 falling falling trend -5.0 (-7.6, -2.4)
Mackinac County 6 *** 78.2 (56.3, 109.3) 68 (14, 82) 9 falling falling trend -4.8 (-7.6, -1.9)
Lake County 6 *** 77.8 (56.8, 107.3) 69 (12, 82) 10 falling falling trend -5.4 (-8.7, -1.9)
Calhoun County 6 *** 77.3 (69.1, 86.3) 70 (47, 80) 68 stable stable trend 8.6 (-11.7, 33.5)
Isabella County 6 *** 76.5 (63.3, 91.7) 71 (33, 82) 25 stable stable trend 10.2 (-21.2, 54.0)
Gratiot County 6 *** 75.8 (61.1, 93.2) 72 (31, 82) 19 falling falling trend -5.2 (-8.0, -2.3)
Oceana County 6 *** 75.2 (58.6, 95.7) 73 (25, 82) 15 falling falling trend -14.6 (-19.6, -9.2)
St. Joseph County 6 *** 74.7 (62.8, 88.2) 74 (40, 82) 29 falling falling trend -4.5 (-5.9, -3.0)
Schoolcraft County 6 *** 72.8 (48.7, 110.4) 75 (9, 82) 6 falling falling trend -6.5 (-9.1, -3.9)
Gogebic County 6 *** 71.9 (53.3, 96.8) 76 (25, 82) 11 stable stable trend -3.6 (-7.7, 0.7)
Iosco County 6 *** 71.8 (57.7, 89.7) 77 (40, 82) 19 falling falling trend -5.6 (-8.3, -2.7)
Montmorency County 6 *** 71.5 (47.1, 108.7) 78 (10, 82) 7 falling falling trend -5.8 (-8.8, -2.7)
Newaygo County 6 *** 66.3 (54.9, 79.8) 79 (57, 82) 25 falling falling trend -12.8 (-17.6, -7.7)
Branch County 6 *** 66.2 (53.0, 82.0) 80 (48, 82) 19 falling falling trend -5.4 (-8.3, -2.3)
Alcona County 6 *** 61.1 (39.4, 95.6) 81 (24, 82) 8 falling falling trend -4.7 (-6.8, -2.4)
Iron County 6 *** 60.3 (42.4, 87.8) 82 (44, 82) 8 falling falling trend -5.4 (-8.9, -1.7)
Keweenaw County 6 ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Notes:
Created by statecancerprofiles.cancer.gov on 10/22/2021 2:15 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.

⋔ 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 1969-2018 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.
*** No Healthy People 2020 Objective for this cancer.
Healthy People 2020 Objectives provided by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

* 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 (2001-2018) - United States Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and National Cancer Institute. Based on the 2020 submission.
5 Source: National Program of Cancer Registries and Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results SEER*Stat Database (2001-2018) - United States Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and National Cancer Institute. Based on the 2020 submission.
6 Source: National Program of Cancer Registries SEER*Stat Database (2001-2018) - United States Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (based on the 2020 submission).
7 Source: SEER November 2020 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 1969-2018 US Population Data File is used with SEER November 2020 data.

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