Return to Home Incidence > Table

Incidence Rates Table

Data Options

Incidence Rate Report for Missouri by County

Prostate (All Stages^), 2013-2017

All Races (includes Hispanic), Male, All Ages

Sorted by CI*Rank
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 descending
Missouri 6 *** 91.4 (90.0, 92.8) N/A 3,364 falling falling trend -4.9 (-6.3, -3.4)
US (SEER+NPCR) 1 *** 104.5 (104.3, 104.7) N/A 192,918 stable stable trend -0.4 (-5.5, 5.0)
Mississippi County 6 *** 161.4 (123.4, 207.5) 1 (1, 21) 13 stable stable trend 1.3 (-1.9, 4.6)
St. Louis County 6 *** 122.5 (118.5, 126.6) 2 (1, 10) 757 falling falling trend -2.9 (-4.0, -1.8)
Clark County 6 *** 116.6 (78.6, 169.5) 3 (1, 97) 6 stable stable trend -0.1 (-5.0, 5.1)
Scott County 6 *** 112.6 (94.0, 134.0) 4 (1, 54) 27 stable stable trend -1.0 (-3.4, 1.3)
St. Charles County 6 *** 110.9 (104.6, 117.6) 5 (3, 21) 241 falling falling trend -3.5 (-4.9, -2.1)
Pemiscot County 6 *** 110.4 (82.2, 145.7) 6 (1, 84) 11 stable stable trend 2.1 (-3.2, 7.6)
Cape Girardeau County 6 *** 110.4 (96.7, 125.6) 7 (2, 39) 49 stable stable trend -1.1 (-2.9, 0.8)
Pettis County 6 *** 108.9 (91.2, 129.3) 8 (1, 59) 27 falling falling trend -4.4 (-6.8, -1.9)
St. Louis City 6 *** 107.7 (100.3, 115.5) 9 (3, 28) 175 falling falling trend -3.3 (-4.9, -1.6)
Schuyler County 6 *** 107.5 (62.3, 177.4) 10 (1, 107) 3 stable stable trend -2.1 (-7.3, 3.5)
Marion County 6 *** 105.6 (85.2, 129.8) 11 (1, 70) 19 stable stable trend -0.9 (-4.0, 2.4)
Stoddard County 6 *** 104.1 (84.9, 126.7) 12 (1, 71) 21 stable stable trend -1.0 (-3.3, 1.4)
Shelby County 6 *** 99.2 (61.1, 155.3) 13 (1, 106) 4 stable stable trend -2.8 (-6.7, 1.4)
Laclede County 6 *** 98.9 (81.5, 119.2) 14 (2, 73) 23 falling falling trend -3.8 (-5.7, -1.8)
Montgomery County 6 *** 98.4 (71.1, 134.4) 15 (1, 99) 9 stable stable trend -1.5 (-5.2, 2.4)
Cole County 6 *** 98.1 (85.4, 112.2) 16 (4, 63) 46 stable stable trend 7.9 (-13.0, 33.9)
Boone County 6 *** 97.4 (87.3, 108.3) 17 (6, 56) 74 falling falling trend -9.1 (-14.7, -3.1)
Chariton County 6 *** 96.7 (64.9, 141.9) 18 (1, 106) 6 stable stable trend 0.5 (-3.8, 5.0)
New Madrid County 6 *** 96.4 (71.9, 127.2) 19 (1, 95) 11 stable stable trend -3.3 (-6.8, 0.4)
Audrain County 6 *** 96.1 (75.2, 121.6) 20 (2, 90) 15 falling falling trend -4.0 (-6.6, -1.2)
Iron County 6 *** 95.9 (68.0, 133.8) 21 (1, 100) 8 stable stable trend -2.5 (-7.5, 2.8)
Greene County 6 *** 95.9 (89.1, 103.1) 22 (10, 47) 151 falling falling trend -3.8 (-5.2, -2.5)
Jefferson County 6 *** 95.3 (87.6, 103.4) 23 (9, 50) 126 falling falling trend -2.8 (-4.4, -1.2)
Ray County 6 *** 95.1 (74.2, 120.5) 24 (2, 90) 15 stable stable trend -2.2 (-5.5, 1.1)
Dallas County 6 *** 94.3 (71.1, 123.8) 25 (2, 95) 12 falling falling trend -2.9 (-4.4, -1.4)
Ste. Genevieve County 6 *** 93.6 (70.8, 122.3) 26 (2, 96) 12 stable stable trend 0.8 (-2.9, 4.7)
Gentry County 6 *** 93.1 (58.3, 144.2) 27 (1, 106) 4
*
*
Pulaski County 6 *** 93.1 (73.3, 116.2) 28 (2, 93) 16 falling falling trend -4.2 (-7.4, -1.0)
Buchanan County 6 *** 92.6 (80.8, 105.8) 29 (7, 70) 46 falling falling trend -1.7 (-3.2, -0.2)
Franklin County 6 *** 91.9 (81.5, 103.3) 30 (9, 67) 60 falling falling trend -4.4 (-6.3, -2.3)
Benton County 6 *** 90.7 (72.5, 114.2) 31 (2, 91) 18 stable stable trend -3.5 (-7.0, 0.1)
Livingston County 6 *** 90.5 (65.1, 123.6) 32 (2, 102) 9 stable stable trend -1.2 (-4.7, 2.3)
Callaway County 6 *** 90.1 (74.0, 108.6) 33 (4, 86) 24 falling falling trend -9.2 (-14.3, -3.9)
Barton County 6 *** 89.6 (63.2, 124.9) 34 (1, 104) 8 stable stable trend -2.0 (-5.4, 1.4)
Madison County 6 *** 89.3 (62.4, 125.0) 35 (2, 105) 7 falling falling trend -4.1 (-7.5, -0.7)
Gasconade County 6 *** 88.3 (65.9, 117.4) 36 (2, 101) 11 falling falling trend -4.6 (-7.1, -1.9)
Stone County 6 *** 87.8 (73.4, 105.2) 37 (7, 89) 29 falling falling trend -4.3 (-7.1, -1.5)
St. Francois County 6 *** 87.7 (74.9, 102.1) 38 (8, 82) 35 stable stable trend 8.1 (-10.7, 30.9)
Christian County 6 *** 86.6 (75.0, 99.6) 39 (11, 82) 42 falling falling trend -5.2 (-6.8, -3.5)
Carroll County 6 *** 86.3 (56.4, 128.4) 40 (1, 107) 5 stable stable trend -2.4 (-6.9, 2.2)
Vernon County 6 *** 85.0 (64.2, 111.0) 41 (3, 102) 12 stable stable trend -1.4 (-4.7, 2.1)
Butler County 6 *** 84.6 (70.0, 101.7) 42 (7, 92) 24 falling falling trend -2.7 (-4.9, -0.5)
Lincoln County 6 *** 84.5 (70.0, 101.1) 43 (8, 90) 26 falling falling trend -5.9 (-8.4, -3.3)
Jasper County 6 *** 84.2 (74.3, 95.1) 44 (16, 83) 54 stable stable trend -1.7 (-4.1, 0.8)
Linn County 6 *** 82.6 (57.9, 116.0) 45 (2, 106) 7 stable stable trend -2.1 (-6.0, 1.9)
Caldwell County 6 *** 82.6 (54.3, 122.5) 46 (2, 106) 6 falling falling trend -11.7 (-17.1, -6.0)
Carter County 6 *** 82.2 (46.3, 137.4) 47 (1, 107) 3
*
*
Lafayette County 6 *** 82.1 (66.1, 101.3) 48 (8, 96) 19 stable stable trend -2.4 (-5.3, 0.6)
Miller County 6 *** 82.0 (64.0, 104.1) 49 (6, 100) 15 stable stable trend -1.6 (-6.1, 3.1)
Harrison County 6 *** 81.9 (53.3, 122.8) 50 (2, 107) 5
*
*
Andrew County 6 *** 81.3 (58.8, 110.2) 51 (4, 105) 9 stable stable trend -1.5 (-5.4, 2.6)
Polk County 6 *** 81.0 (64.2, 101.3) 52 (9, 99) 16 falling falling trend -5.1 (-7.6, -2.6)
Nodaway County 6 *** 80.6 (59.1, 107.8) 53 (4, 104) 10 stable stable trend -3.1 (-6.9, 1.0)
Webster County 6 *** 80.3 (64.3, 99.4) 54 (10, 99) 18 falling falling trend -4.6 (-7.2, -1.9)
Putnam County 6 *** 80.2 (46.4, 135.6) 55 (1, 107) 3
*
*
Taney County 6 *** 79.1 (67.1, 93.0) 56 (18, 94) 32 falling falling trend -5.0 (-7.8, -2.2)
Grundy County 6 *** 78.8 (52.0, 116.4) 57 (2, 107) 6 stable stable trend -2.8 (-7.2, 1.7)
Saline County 6 *** 78.5 (59.6, 102.0) 58 (7, 103) 12 falling falling trend -5.9 (-10.3, -1.2)
Daviess County 6 *** 77.7 (49.8, 118.3) 59 (2, 107) 5
*
*
Osage County 6 *** 76.9 (53.2, 108.5) 60 (3, 106) 7 falling falling trend -6.3 (-11.0, -1.4)
Pike County 6 *** 76.3 (56.0, 102.0) 61 (7, 105) 10 stable stable trend -3.4 (-8.0, 1.5)
Douglas County 6 *** 76.2 (55.0, 104.9) 62 (6, 106) 9 stable stable trend -3.3 (-6.9, 0.5)
Lawrence County 6 *** 76.0 (61.4, 93.2) 63 (16, 102) 19 stable stable trend -2.2 (-4.5, 0.0)
Morgan County 6 *** 75.8 (58.3, 98.1) 64 (11, 104) 13 falling falling trend -4.7 (-8.4, -0.8)
Platte County 6 *** 75.7 (65.4, 87.3) 65 (25, 95) 42 falling falling trend -8.4 (-13.0, -3.6)
Jackson County 6 *** 75.7 (71.7, 79.8) 66 (47, 81) 288 falling falling trend -4.3 (-5.3, -3.3)
Reynolds County 6 *** 75.6 (46.1, 121.5) 67 (2, 107) 4
*
*
Wright County 6 *** 75.0 (55.1, 100.6) 68 (7, 106) 10 falling falling trend -4.3 (-7.5, -0.9)
Macon County 6 *** 74.5 (53.7, 101.9) 69 (7, 106) 9 stable stable trend -1.6 (-6.2, 3.2)
Perry County 6 *** 74.4 (54.1, 100.3) 70 (8, 106) 9 stable stable trend -3.6 (-8.9, 2.0)
Clay County 6 *** 74.4 (67.6, 81.6) 71 (40, 88) 95 falling falling trend -12.7 (-16.8, -8.5)
Ralls County 6 *** 74.3 (49.3, 109.9) 72 (3, 107) 6 stable stable trend -0.6 (-6.4, 5.7)
Atchison County 6 *** 73.7 (41.6, 126.4) 73 (2, 107) 3 falling falling trend -5.6 (-10.2, -0.8)
Camden County 6 *** 73.3 (62.2, 86.4) 74 (31, 98) 34 stable stable trend 2.3 (-14.6, 22.6)
Wayne County 6 *** 73.1 (52.4, 101.2) 75 (8, 107) 8 stable stable trend -1.9 (-5.9, 2.3)
Cooper County 6 *** 72.9 (51.6, 100.6) 76 (6, 107) 8 stable stable trend -3.0 (-7.7, 1.9)
Crawford County 6 *** 72.5 (55.8, 93.5) 77 (15, 105) 13 falling falling trend -7.0 (-9.8, -4.0)
Ripley County 6 *** 72.1 (49.9, 102.0) 78 (6, 107) 7 stable stable trend -2.7 (-5.4, 0.1)
Dade County 6 *** 71.9 (45.6, 111.7) 79 (3, 107) 5 falling falling trend -7.2 (-10.0, -4.4)
Clinton County 6 *** 70.2 (52.1, 93.4) 80 (15, 106) 10 falling falling trend -5.5 (-9.1, -1.8)
Warren County 6 *** 70.0 (55.3, 87.7) 81 (22, 105) 16 falling falling trend -5.7 (-8.8, -2.5)
Barry County 6 *** 69.1 (55.4, 85.6) 82 (23, 104) 18 falling falling trend -4.4 (-7.9, -0.8)
Washington County 6 *** 68.5 (51.3, 90.0) 83 (16, 106) 11 stable stable trend -2.4 (-5.8, 1.0)
Adair County 6 *** 67.8 (48.6, 92.4) 84 (11, 107) 8 stable stable trend -4.9 (-9.6, 0.1)
Dunklin County 6 *** 67.4 (51.6, 86.8) 85 (22, 106) 13 stable stable trend 9.6 (-2.4, 23.0)
Monroe County 6 *** 66.9 (42.2, 103.7) 86 (6, 107) 5 falling falling trend -12.0 (-16.2, -7.7)
Howard County 6 *** 66.6 (42.0, 102.1) 87 (5, 107) 5 falling falling trend -5.6 (-10.5, -0.4)
Dent County 6 *** 66.4 (47.2, 92.2) 88 (15, 107) 8 stable stable trend -3.9 (-7.8, 0.2)
DeKalb County 6 *** 66.2 (42.8, 98.4) 89 (7, 107) 5
*
*
Phelps County 6 *** 65.8 (52.5, 81.6) 90 (33, 106) 17 falling falling trend -5.8 (-8.5, -2.9)
McDonald County 6 *** 65.5 (46.6, 89.7) 91 (17, 107) 8 stable stable trend -2.6 (-7.1, 2.1)
Cedar County 6 *** 65.4 (45.8, 92.3) 92 (15, 107) 8 falling falling trend -4.3 (-7.4, -1.0)
Moniteau County 6 *** 65.1 (44.0, 93.1) 93 (12, 107) 6 stable stable trend -4.8 (-10.5, 1.3)
Randolph County 6 *** 62.3 (45.3, 83.8) 94 (21, 107) 9 falling falling trend -3.7 (-7.1, -0.1)
Johnson County 6 *** 62.1 (49.4, 77.1) 95 (46, 106) 17 falling falling trend -14.4 (-20.4, -7.9)
Newton County 6 *** 61.9 (50.8, 74.8) 96 (50, 106) 23 falling falling trend -4.3 (-6.8, -1.6)
Henry County 6 *** 60.9 (45.1, 81.4) 97 (32, 107) 10 falling falling trend -7.0 (-9.9, -3.9)
Ozark County 6 *** 58.3 (38.7, 89.1) 98 (21, 107) 6 stable stable trend -4.4 (-9.4, 0.9)
Lewis County 6 *** 57.0 (34.1, 90.9) 99 (14, 107) 4 falling falling trend -6.6 (-11.2, -1.7)
Bates County 6 *** 56.8 (38.2, 82.2) 100 (27, 107) 6 falling falling trend -5.6 (-9.5, -1.5)
St. Clair County 6 *** 56.3 (36.1, 87.3) 101 (19, 107) 5 falling falling trend -5.5 (-9.7, -1.1)
Cass County 6 *** 55.1 (47.0, 64.2) 102 (75, 106) 34 falling falling trend -4.5 (-7.0, -2.0)
Bollinger County 6 *** 54.0 (34.4, 82.2) 103 (28, 107) 5 falling falling trend -6.6 (-10.0, -3.0)
Texas County 6 *** 52.0 (38.3, 69.6) 104 (58, 107) 10 falling falling trend -7.0 (-10.0, -3.9)
Howell County 6 *** 51.9 (40.3, 66.2) 105 (69, 107) 14 falling falling trend -6.6 (-10.8, -2.1)
Hickory County 6 *** 48.5 (30.6, 79.0) 106 (38, 107) 5 falling falling trend -6.2 (-9.5, -2.8)
Oregon County 6 *** 36.8 (21.3, 62.3) 107 (75, 107) 3
*
*
Holt County 6 ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Knox County 6 ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Maries County 6 ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Mercer County 6 ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Scotland County 6 ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Shannon County 6 ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Sullivan County 6 ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Worth County 6 ***
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Notes:
Created by statecancerprofiles.cancer.gov on 05/08/2021 12:05 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.

⋔ 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 1969-2017 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 (2001-2017) - United States Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and National Cancer Institute. Based on the 2019 submission.
6 Source: National Program of Cancer Registries SEER*Stat Database (2001-2017) - United States Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (based on the 2019 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 1969-2017 US Population Data File is used with SEER November 2019 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